On Wed, Jan 18 2023 at 10:22, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:23:20PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 16 2023 at 14:50, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> > The global irq_domain_mutex is now held in all paths that update the
>> > revmap structures so there is no longer any need for the revmap mutex.
>>
>> This can also go after the 3rd race fix, but ...
>>
>> > static void irq_domain_clear_mapping(struct irq_domain *domain,
>> > irq_hw_number_t hwirq)
>> > {
>> > + lockdep_assert_held(&irq_domain_mutex);
>>
>> these lockdep asserts want to be part of the [dis]association race
>> fixes. They are completely unrelated to the removal of the revmap_mutex.
>
> No, they are very much related to the removal of the revmap_mutex. These
> functions deal with the revmap structures which before this patch were
> clearly only modified with the revmap_mutex held.
>
> The lockdep assert is here to guarantee that my claim that all current
> (and future) paths that end up modifying these structures do so under
> the irq_domain_mutex instead.
>
>> Your race fixes change the locking and you want to ensure that all
>> callers comply right there, no?
>
> I want to make sure that all callers of these function comply, yes.
> That's why the asserts belong in this patch.
You can do this in a two step approach.
1) Add the new locking and ensure that the lock is held when
the functions are called
2) Safely remove the revmap_mutex because you already established
that revmap is protected by some other means
Thanks,
tglx
