From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@qumranet.com>
Lockdep can't recognize if spinlocks are at a different address. So
using trylock in a loop is one way to avoid lockdep to generate false
positives. After lockdep will be fixed this change can and should be
reverted.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@qumranet.com>
---
Resubmit because I didn't update the subject and so I improved the
comments too. This is mostly to show it's a bug in lockdep and it can
be trivially worked around without having to fix lockdep for real, any
superior solution to this hack is more than welcome and recommended.
diff -r 3469dce61df1 mm/mmap.c
--- a/mm/mmap.c Tue Jul 29 20:01:28 2008 +0200
+++ b/mm/mmap.c Mon Aug 04 19:54:27 2008 +0200
@@ -2279,8 +2279,12 @@ static void vm_lock_anon_vma(struct anon
/*
* The LSB of head.next can't change from under us
* because we hold the mm_all_locks_mutex.
+ *
+ * spin_lock would confuse lockdep who doesn't notice
+ * the 'anon_vma' always changing address.
*/
- spin_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
+ while (!spin_trylock(&anon_vma->lock))
+ cpu_relax();
/*
* We can safely modify head.next after taking the
* anon_vma->lock. If some other vma in this mm shares
@@ -2310,7 +2314,12 @@ static void vm_lock_mapping(struct addre
*/
if (test_and_set_bit(AS_MM_ALL_LOCKS, &mapping->flags))
BUG();
- spin_lock(&mapping->i_mmap_lock);
+ /*
+ * spin_lock would confuse lockdep who doesn't notice
+ * the 'mapping' always changing address.
+ */
+ while (!spin_trylock(&mapping->i_mmap_lock))
+ cpu_relax();
}
}
--
