On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 06:19:28PM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> The new bit can be any possible lock usage except it is garbage, so the

s/except it/except when it/ ?

> cases in switch can be made simpler. Warn early on if wrong usage bit is
> passed without taking locks. No functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yuyang Du <[email protected]>
> ---
>  kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 21 +++++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index c08ec88..291cc9c 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -3476,6 +3476,11 @@ static int mark_lock(struct task_struct *curr, struct 
> held_lock *this,
>  {
>       unsigned int new_mask = 1 << new_bit, ret = 1;
>  
> +     if (new_bit >= LOCK_USAGE_STATES) {
> +             WARN_ON(1);

Does that want to be DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON() ?

> +             return 0;
> +     }
> +
>       /*
>        * If already set then do not dirty the cacheline,
>        * nor do any checks:
> @@ -3499,25 +3504,13 @@ static int mark_lock(struct task_struct *curr, struct 
> held_lock *this,
>               return 0;
>  
>       switch (new_bit) {
> -#define LOCKDEP_STATE(__STATE)                       \
> -     case LOCK_USED_IN_##__STATE:            \
> -     case LOCK_USED_IN_##__STATE##_READ:     \
> -     case LOCK_ENABLED_##__STATE:            \
> -     case LOCK_ENABLED_##__STATE##_READ:
> -#include "lockdep_states.h"
> -#undef LOCKDEP_STATE
> -             ret = mark_lock_irq(curr, this, new_bit);
> -             if (!ret)
> -                     return 0;
> -             break;
>       case LOCK_USED:
>               debug_atomic_dec(nr_unused_locks);
>               break;
>       default:
> -             if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
> +             ret = mark_lock_irq(curr, this, new_bit);
> +             if (!ret)
>                       return 0;
> -             WARN_ON(1);
> -             return 0;
>       }
>  
>       graph_unlock();
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1
> 

Reply via email to