lockdep: Show subclass in pretty print of lockdep output
authorSteven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
Thu, 3 Nov 2011 00:24:16 +0000 (20:24 -0400)
committerSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Mon, 7 Nov 2011 16:01:46 +0000 (11:01 -0500)
commite5e78d08f3ab3094783b8df08a5b6d1d1a56a58f
tree524c4faf387d4ac1dc46b23015a9d8fc4823ab88
parent3890c136357284cb0656f9dd0e62286995ad32e9
lockdep: Show subclass in pretty print of lockdep output

The pretty print of the lockdep debug splat uses just the lock name
to show how the locking scenario happens. But when it comes to
nesting locks, the output becomes confusing which takes away the point
of the pretty printing of the lock scenario.

Without displaying the subclass info, we get the following output:

  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

        CPU0                    CPU1
        ----                    ----
   lock(slock-AF_INET);
                                lock(slock-AF_INET);
                                lock(slock-AF_INET);
   lock(slock-AF_INET);

  *** DEADLOCK ***

The above looks more of a A->A locking bug than a A->B B->A.
By adding the subclass to the output, we can see what really happened:

 other info that might help us debug this:

  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

        CPU0                    CPU1
        ----                    ----
   lock(slock-AF_INET);
                                lock(slock-AF_INET/1);
                                lock(slock-AF_INET);
   lock(slock-AF_INET/1);

  *** DEADLOCK ***

This bug was discovered while tracking down a real bug caught by lockdep.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20111025202049.GB25043@hostway.ca
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Simon Kirby <sim@hostway.ca>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
kernel/lockdep.c