Since this message is printed when dynamically allocated spinlocks (e.g.
kzalloc()) are used without initialization (e.g. spin_lock_init()),
suggest developers to check whether initialization functions for objects
are called, before making developers wonder what annotation is missing.
Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <[email protected]>
---
kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index c6d0c1dc6253..44c549f5c061 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -931,6 +931,7 @@ static bool assign_lock_key(struct lockdep_map *lock)
debug_locks_off();
pr_err("INFO: trying to register non-static key.\n");
pr_err("the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.\n");
+ pr_err("maybe you didn't initialize this object before you use?\n");
pr_err("turning off the locking correctness validator.\n");
dump_stack();
return false;
--
2.18.4
The following commit has been merged into the perf/urgent branch of tip:
Commit-ID: 3a85969e9d912d5dd85362ee37b5f81266e00e77
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/3a85969e9d912d5dd85362ee37b5f81266e00e77
Author: Tetsuo Handa <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 15:49:13 +09:00
Committer: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
CommitterDate: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:59:57 +01:00
lockdep: Add a missing initialization hint to the "INFO: Trying to register non-static key" message
Since this message is printed when dynamically allocated spinlocks (e.g.
kzalloc()) are used without initialization (e.g. spin_lock_init()),
suggest to developers to check whether initialization functions for objects
were called, before making developers wonder what annotation is missing.
[ mingo: Minor tweaks to the message. ]
Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
---
kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index c6d0c1d..c30eb88 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ static bool assign_lock_key(struct lockdep_map *lock)
/* Debug-check: all keys must be persistent! */
debug_locks_off();
pr_err("INFO: trying to register non-static key.\n");
- pr_err("the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.\n");
+ pr_err("The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe\n");
+ pr_err("you didn't initialize this object before use?\n");
pr_err("turning off the locking correctness validator.\n");
dump_stack();
return false;
On 3/21/21 2:49 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Since this message is printed when dynamically allocated spinlocks (e.g.
> kzalloc()) are used without initialization (e.g. spin_lock_init()),
> suggest developers to check whether initialization functions for objects
> are called, before making developers wonder what annotation is missing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index c6d0c1dc6253..44c549f5c061 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -931,6 +931,7 @@ static bool assign_lock_key(struct lockdep_map *lock)
> debug_locks_off();
> pr_err("INFO: trying to register non-static key.\n");
> pr_err("the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.\n");
> + pr_err("maybe you didn't initialize this object before you use?\n");
> pr_err("turning off the locking correctness validator.\n");
> dump_stack();
> return false;
The only way this message is written is when the appropriate lock init
function isn't called for locks in dynamically allocated objects. I
think you can just say so without the word "maybe". Like "the code is
fine but needs lockdep annotation by calling appropriate lock
initialization function.".
Cheers,
Longman