Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200930011944.19869-1-jannh@google.com> <CAG48ez03YJG9JU_6tGiMcaVjuTyRE_o4LEQ7901b5ZoCnNAjcg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200930123000.GC9916@ziepe.ca> <CAG48ez2z1R8MLS0_pjhBSGnJC8RwaHMpiGdv8GhJUCrwtsLOPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAG48ez0fhY0twgriBDv9RU1YG8mBxg_KoK_YsLPWYo4feAQ=Sg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200930232655.GE9916@ziepe.ca> <CAG48ez0i2++2Jg1Z-RyCKn-uZ-gcszVknAaCyXbJyptuMxbCsg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201001191512.GF9916@ziepe.ca> <CAG48ez3GW9sRfZWwx+YpKdouAVT+o9zQR73-itJMbLCXTiUxBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201001234127.GG9916@ziepe.ca>
In-Reply-To: <20201001234127.GG9916@ziepe.ca>
From:   Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:55:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CAG48ez3pvgEYiGziw=_3wVQ5mDrWWyLD_DidoB+L4Zu=bb=KqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mmap locking API: Don't check locking if the mm isn't
 live yet
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc:     Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 1:41 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 10:16:35PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote:
> > > A subclass isn't right, it has to be a _nested annotation.
> > >
> > > nested locking is a pretty good reason to not be able to do this, this
> > > is something lockdep does struggle to model.
> >
> > Did I get the terminology wrong? I thought they were the same. The
> > down_*_nested() APIs take an argument "subclass", with the default
> > subclass for the functions without "_nested" being 0.
>
> AFAIK a subclass at init time sticks with the lock forever, the
> _nested ones are temporary overrides.
>
> I think what you kind of want is to start out with
> lockdep_set_novalidate_class() then switch to a real class once things
> are finished. Not sure exactly how :)

Huh, is there an API that sets a *subclass* (not a class) at init
time? I don't think there is.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure I just need to use the normal _nested()
locking API. I'm still cleaning up and testing a little bit, but I'll
send it out in a short while, unless I run into unexpected trouble.
Let's continue this if necessary once there's a concrete patch to talk
about. :)