On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:39:45PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > This is a similar idea to the fs_reclaim fake lockdep lock. It's > fairly easy to provoke a specific notifier to be run on a specific > range: Just prep it, and then munmap() it. > > A bit harder, but still doable, is to provoke the mmu notifiers for > all the various callchains that might lead to them. But both at the > same time is really hard to reliable hit, especially when you want to > exercise paths like direct reclaim or compaction, where it's not > easy to control what exactly will be unmapped. > > By introducing a lockdep map to tie them all together we allow lockdep > to see a lot more dependencies, without having to actually hit them > in a single challchain while testing. > > Aside: Since I typed this to test i915 mmu notifiers I've only rolled > this out for the invaliate_range_start callback. If there's > interest, we should probably roll this out to all of them. But my > undestanding of core mm is seriously lacking, and I'm not clear on > whether we need a lockdep map for each callback, or whether some can > be shared. I need to read more on lockdep but it is legal to have mmu notifier invalidation within each other. For instance when you munmap you might split a huge pmd and it will trigger a second invalidate range while the munmap one is not done yet. Would that trigger the lockdep here ? Worst case i can think of is 2 invalidate_range_start chain one after the other. I don't think you can triggers a 3 levels nesting but maybe. Cheers, Jérôme _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
