On 2019-03-18 11:48:28 [+0000], Liu, Yongxin wrote:
> Bummer. That would dead lock indeed.
> Is it easily possible to recognize the recursive case?
Not easily. I don't have test case for recursive call.
For now, just code analysis.
So I've been playing with qemu's nvdimm device. So I *think* the
recursive case is here not possible because qemu only supports pmem
while it would require the blk mode to trigger it. It is just a wild
On top of qemu's nvdimm device I can create a block device via
ndctl create-namespace namespace0.0 --mode=sector
and then I trigger the code path in question.
I would *really* prefer to understand the recursive case and avoid it.
That way the recursive case is explicitly known and uses another path.
The lock can then be always acquired which gives you always lockdep
coverage (which is now missing unless you have more LANEs than CPUs).
The local_lock thingy is completely unneeded: a simple get_cpu_light()
would do the job.