On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 8:26 AM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 5/3/23 08:18, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> >>> +static inline void rem_ctx(struct codetag_ctx *ctx,
> >>> + void (*free_ctx)(struct kref *refcount))
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct codetag_with_ctx *ctc = ctx->ctc;
> >>> +
> >>> + spin_lock(&ctc->ctx_lock);
> >> This could deadlock when allocator is called from the IRQ context.
> > I see. spin_lock_irqsave() then?
>
> Yes. But, even better, please turn on lockdep when you are testing. It
> will find these for you. If you're on x86, we have a set of handy-dandy
> debug options that you can add to an existing config with:
>
> make x86_debug.config
Nice!
I thought I tested with lockdep enabled but I might be wrong. The
beauty of working on multiple patchsets in parallel is that I can't
remember what I did for each one :)
>
> That said, I'm as concerned as everyone else that this is all "new" code
> and doesn't lean on existing tracing or things like PAGE_OWNER enough.
Yeah, that's being actively discussed.
>
