On 02/18/2015 09:13 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:

quoted

Here the same thing but without cmpxchg(). _If_ after an increment the
value is negative then we take slowpath. Otherwise we have the lock.

OK, so I need to make it so it can nest with trylock. I have to look at
the patch again because it has been a while.

I have reverted the patch and can confirm that cpufreq works again.

I did some testing on vanilla and -RT:
- down_read(l) + down_read(l)
  this triggers a lockdep warning about a possible deadlock the lock is
  obtained.

- down_read(l) + down_read_trylock()
  this passes without a warning.

So I think we good now.

An RW sem must not do two down_read()s on the same lock (it's fine for
a trylock if it has a fail safe for it). The reason is, the second
down_read() will block if there's a writer waiting. Thus you are
guaranteed a deadlock if you have the lock for read, a write comes in
and waits, and you grab the RW sem again, because it will block, and
the writer is waiting for the reader to release. Thus you have a
deadlock.

I fully understand. However nesting is allowed according to the code in
vanilla and now again in -RT. Lockdep complains properly so we should
catch people doing it wrong in both trees.

I'll have to revisit this. I also need to revisit the multi readers
(although Thomas hates it, but he even admitted there's a better way to
do it. Now only if I could remember what that was ;-)

Okay. For now I keep the revert since it looks sane and simple.

Thanks,

-- Steve

Sebastian