lockdep: Reduce stack_trace usage

When calling check_prevs_add(), if all validations passed
add_lock_to_list() will add new lock to dependency tree and
alloc stack_trace for each list_entry.

But at this time, we are always on the same stack, so stack_trace
for each list_entry has the same value. This is redundant and eats
up lots of memory which could lead to warning on low
MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES.

Use one copy of stack_trace instead.

V2: As suggested by Peter Zijlstra, move save_trace() from
    check_prevs_add() to check_prev_add().
    Add tracking for trylock dependence which is also redundant.

Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@windriver.com>
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
LKML-Reference: <20100504065711.GC10784@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

1 files changed, 21 insertions, 8 deletions

diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c
index 9cf79858fd82..51080807dc8c 100644
--- a/kernel/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/lockdep.c
@@ -805,7 +805,8 @@ static struct lock_list *alloc_list_entry(void)
  * Add a new dependency to the head of the list:
  */
 static int add_lock_to_list(struct lock_class *class, struct lock_class *this,
-                            struct list_head *head, unsigned long ip, int distance)
+                            struct list_head *head, unsigned long ip,
+                            int distance, struct stack_trace *trace)
 {
         struct lock_list *entry;
         /*
@@ -816,11 +817,9 @@ static int add_lock_to_list(struct lock_class *class, struct lock_class *this,
         if (!entry)
                 return 0;
 
-        if (!save_trace(&entry->trace))
-                return 0;
-
         entry->class = this;
         entry->distance = distance;
+        entry->trace = *trace;
         /*
          * Since we never remove from the dependency list, the list can
          * be walked lockless by other CPUs, it's only allocation
@@ -1622,12 +1621,20 @@ check_deadlock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next,
  */
 static int
 check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
-               struct held_lock *next, int distance)
+               struct held_lock *next, int distance, int trylock_loop)
 {
         struct lock_list *entry;
         int ret;
         struct lock_list this;
         struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
+        /*
+         * Static variable, serialized by the graph_lock().
+         *
+         * We use this static variable to save the stack trace in case
+         * we call into this function multiple times due to encountering
+         * trylocks in the held lock stack.
+         */
+        static struct stack_trace trace;
 
         /*
          * Prove that the new <prev> -> <next> dependency would not
@@ -1675,20 +1682,23 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
                 }
         }
 
+        if (!trylock_loop && !save_trace(&trace))
+                return 0;
+
         /*
          * Ok, all validations passed, add the new lock
          * to the previous lock's dependency list:
          */
         ret = add_lock_to_list(hlock_class(prev), hlock_class(next),
                                &hlock_class(prev)->locks_after,
-                               next->acquire_ip, distance);
+                               next->acquire_ip, distance, &trace);
 
         if (!ret)
                 return 0;
 
         ret = add_lock_to_list(hlock_class(next), hlock_class(prev),
                                &hlock_class(next)->locks_before,
-                               next->acquire_ip, distance);
+                               next->acquire_ip, distance, &trace);
         if (!ret)
                 return 0;
 
@@ -1718,6 +1728,7 @@ static int
 check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
 {
         int depth = curr->lockdep_depth;
+        int trylock_loop = 0;
         struct held_lock *hlock;
 
         /*
@@ -1743,7 +1754,8 @@ check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
                  * added:
                  */
                 if (hlock->read != 2) {
-                        if (!check_prev_add(curr, hlock, next, distance))
+                        if (!check_prev_add(curr, hlock, next,
+                                                distance, trylock_loop))
                                 return 0;
                         /*
                          * Stop after the first non-trylock entry,
@@ -1766,6 +1778,7 @@ check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
                 if (curr->held_locks[depth].irq_context !=
                                 curr->held_locks[depth-1].irq_context)
                         break;
+                trylock_loop = 1;
         }
         return 1;
 out_bug: