Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Mon, 16 Jan 2023 10:00:52 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC v7 00/23] DEPT(Dependency Tracker) |
| |
[ Back from travel, so trying to make sense of this series.. ]
On Sun, Jan 8, 2023 at 7:33 PM Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> wrote: > > I've been developing a tool for detecting deadlock possibilities by > tracking wait/event rather than lock(?) acquisition order to try to > cover all synchonization machanisms. It's done on v6.2-rc2.
Ugh. I hate how this adds random patterns like
if (timeout == MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT) sdt_might_sleep_strong(NULL); else sdt_might_sleep_strong_timeout(NULL); ... sdt_might_sleep_finish();
to various places, it seems so very odd and unmaintainable.
I also recall this giving a fair amount of false positives, are they all fixed?
Anyway, I'd really like the lockdep people to comment and be involved. We did have a fairly recent case of "lockdep doesn't track page lock dependencies because it fundamentally cannot" issue, so DEPT might fix those kinds of missing dependency analysis. See
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/00000000000060d41f05f139aa44@google.com/
for some context to that one, but at teh same time I would *really* want the lockdep people more involved and acking this work.
Maybe I missed the email where you reported on things DEPT has found (and on the lack of false positives)?
Linus
| |