From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:32:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1310664742.27864.45.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110714170540.GE2349@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 10:05 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 01:02:09PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 12:58 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > void __rcu_read_unlock(void)
> > > {
> > > struct task_struct *t = current;
> > >
> > > barrier(); /* needed if we ever invoke rcu_read_unlock in rcutree.c */
> > > --t->rcu_read_lock_nesting;
> > > barrier(); /* decrement before load of ->rcu_read_unlock_special */
> > > if (t->rcu_read_lock_nesting == 0 &&
> > > unlikely(ACCESS_ONCE(t->rcu_read_unlock_special)))
> > > rcu_read_unlock_special(t);
> > >
> > > Thus the question is, how did we get rcu_read_unlock_special set here?
> >
> > Looks like another process could set this with:
> >
> > static int rcu_boost(struct rcu_node *rnp)
> > {
> > [...]
> > t = container_of(tb, struct task_struct, rcu_node_entry);
> > rt_mutex_init_proxy_locked(&mtx, t);
> > t->rcu_boost_mutex = &mtx;
> > t->rcu_read_unlock_special |= RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED;
>
> But only if that task was preempted while in the RCU read-side critical
> section that resulted in the call to rcu_read_unlock_special(), which
> should not happen if the task has irqs disabled for the duration of that
> RCU read-side critical section, right?
>
static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
{
[...]
special = t->rcu_read_unlock_special; (A)
[...]
for (;;) { (B)
rnp = t->rcu_blocked_node;
raw_spin_lock(&rnp->lock); /* irqs already disabled. */
if (rnp == t->rcu_blocked_node)
break;
raw_spin_unlock(&rnp->lock); /* irqs remain disabled. */
}
[...]
list_del_init(&t->rcu_node_entry);
[...]
if (empty)
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
else
rcu_report_unblock_qs_rnp(rnp, flags);
/* Unboost if we were boosted. */
if (special & RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED) {
t->rcu_read_unlock_special &= ~RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED;
rt_mutex_unlock(t->rcu_boost_mutex);
t->rcu_boost_mutex = NULL;
}
Now what happens if between (A) and (B) the kthread wakes up and calls
rc_boost()?
static int rcu_boost(struct rcu_node *rnp)
{
[...]
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rnp->lock, flags);
[...]
t = container_of(tb, struct task_struct, rcu_node_entry);
[...]
t->rcu_read_unlock_special |= RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED;
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
Seems that we could have RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED set, and never get
cleared, because rcu_read_unlock_special() doesn't look at the flags
directly, but at a local variable. The next rcu_read_unlock() will now
see this flag set!
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-14 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-14 14:49 Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 16:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-14 16:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:16 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 19:15 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 19:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:38 ` Dave Jones
2011-07-14 20:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:38 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 16:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 17:02 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 17:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 17:32 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2011-07-14 17:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 19:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 20:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 11:05 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-15 11:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 11:35 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-15 11:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 18:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 12:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 13:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 14:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 15:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 16:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 16:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 21:48 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-15 22:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-16 19:42 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-17 0:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-17 1:56 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-17 14:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-18 15:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-18 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-18 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 16:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-15 17:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 17:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-15 17:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 17:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-15 18:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-08-07 16:22 Justin P. Mattock
2011-08-11 20:57 ` Justin P. Mattock
2009-12-06 10:11 Richard Zidlicky
2009-10-10 23:09 John Kacur
2007-02-08 15:03 Pedro M. López
2006-10-16 14:05 alpha @ steudten Engineering
2006-10-16 14:32 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-16 15:42 ` Randy Dunlap
2006-10-16 15:46 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 6:02 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-19 6:30 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1310664742.27864.45.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®