Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1559855690.6132.50.camel@lca.pw> <CAHttsrYCD1xvL6hf6dXZ_6rB2pEra0HDZ+m5n8EMQr3+5AShnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1559916886.6132.52.camel@lca.pw>
In-Reply-To: <1559916886.6132.52.camel@lca.pw>
From:   Yuyang Du <duyuyang@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jun 2019 10:23:18 +0800
Message-ID: <CAHttsrZN09-_GXujv2H5gAORLHcO2onrotFND5GrDXRGRtFpJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: "locking/lockdep: Consolidate lock usage bit initialization" is buggy
To:     Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc:     "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Thanks for the further validation.

On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 22:14, Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> wrote:
> Reverted the commit on the top of linux-next fixed the issue.
>
> With the commit (triggering the warning
> DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(debug_atomic_read(nr_unused_locks) != nr_unused)),
>
> # cat /proc/lockdep_stats
> lock-classes:                         1110 [max: 8192]
> stack-trace entries:                     0 [max: 524288]
> combined max dependencies:               1
> uncategorized locks:                     0
> unused locks:                         1110
> max locking depth:                      14
> debug_locks:                             0
>
> Without the commit (no warning),
>
> # cat /proc/lockdep_stats
> lock-classes:                         1110 [max: 8192]
> stack-trace entries:                  9932 [max: 524288]
> combined max dependencies:               1
> uncategorized locks:                  1113
> unused locks:                            0
> max locking depth:                      14
> debug_locks:                             1

Then it is obviously we are talking on different things; then it is
obviously a configuration problem. Fix will be posted soon.

Sorry the bug.

Thanks,
Yuyang