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;
From:   Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Apr 2020 17:04:54 +0100 (BST)
To:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
cc:     Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        boqun.feng@gmail.com, Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        "open list:FILESYSTEMS (VFS and infrastructure)" 
        <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:FILESYSTEM DIRECT ACCESS (DAX)" 
        <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] dax: Add missing annotation for
 wait_entry_unlocked()
In-Reply-To: <20200401100125.GB19466@quack2.suse.cz>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.21.2004011702002.25676@earth.lan>
References: <0/7> <20200331204643.11262-1-jbi.octave@gmail.com> <20200331204643.11262-4-jbi.octave@gmail.com> <20200401100125.GB19466@quack2.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 1 Apr 2020, Jan Kara wrote:

> On Tue 31-03-20 21:46:39, Jules Irenge wrote:
>> Sparse reports a warning at wait_entry_unlocked()
>>
>> warning: context imbalance in wait_entry_unlocked()
>> 	- unexpected unlock
>>
>> The root cause is the missing annotation at wait_entry_unlocked()
>> Add the missing __releases(xa) annotation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/dax.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
>> index 1f1f0201cad1..adcd2a57fbad 100644
>> --- a/fs/dax.c
>> +++ b/fs/dax.c
>> @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ static void *get_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, unsigned int order)
>>   * After we call xas_unlock_irq(), we cannot touch xas->xa.
>>   */
>>  static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
>> +	__releases(xa)
>
> Thanks for the patch but is this a proper sparse annotation? I'd rather
> expect something like __releases(xas->xa->xa_lock) here...
>
> 								Honza
>
>>  {
>>  	struct wait_exceptional_entry_queue ewait;
>>  	wait_queue_head_t *wq;
>> --
>> 2.24.1
>>
> -- 
> Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
> SUSE Labs, CR
>
Thanks for the kind reply. I learned and changed. If there is a further 
issue, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thanks,
Jules