From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com,
bobby.prani@gmail.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/12] rcu: Improve diagnostics for blocked critical sections in irq
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 09:03:49 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1425402235-11061-6-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1425402235-11061-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
If an RCU read-side critical section occurs within an interrupt handler
or a softirq handler, it cannot have been preempted. Therefore, there is
a check in rcu_read_unlock_special() checking for this error. However,
when this check triggers, it lacks diagnostic information. This commit
therefore moves rcu_read_unlock()'s lockdep annotation to follow the
call to __rcu_read_unlock() and changes rcu_read_unlock_special()'s
WARN_ON_ONCE() to an lockdep_rcu_suspicious() in order to locate where
the offending RCU read-side critical section began. In addition, the
value of the ->rcu_read_unlock_special field is printed.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
include/linux/lockdep.h | 7 ++++++-
include/linux/rcupdate.h | 2 +-
kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 8 +++++++-
3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/lockdep.h b/include/linux/lockdep.h
index 74ab23176e9b..066ba4157541 100644
--- a/include/linux/lockdep.h
+++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
@@ -531,8 +531,13 @@ do { \
# define might_lock_read(lock) do { } while (0)
#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
void lockdep_rcu_suspicious(const char *file, const int line, const char *s);
+#else
+static inline void
+lockdep_rcu_suspicious(const char *file, const int line, const char *s)
+{
+}
#endif
#endif /* __LINUX_LOCKDEP_H */
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 3e6afed51051..70b896e16f19 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -942,9 +942,9 @@ static inline void rcu_read_unlock(void)
{
rcu_lockdep_assert(rcu_is_watching(),
"rcu_read_unlock() used illegally while idle");
- rcu_lock_release(&rcu_lock_map);
__release(RCU);
__rcu_read_unlock();
+ rcu_lock_release(&rcu_lock_map); /* Keep acq info for rls diags. */
}
/**
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
index 93eeefeacc02..fec7034d41db 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
@@ -334,7 +334,13 @@ void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
}
/* Hardware IRQ handlers cannot block, complain if they get here. */
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(in_irq() || in_serving_softirq())) {
+ if (in_irq() || in_serving_softirq()) {
+ lockdep_rcu_suspicious(__FILE__, __LINE__,
+ "rcu_read_unlock() from irq or softirq with blocking in critical section!!!\n");
+ pr_alert("->rcu_read_unlock_special: %#x (b: %d, nq: %d)\n",
+ t->rcu_read_unlock_special.s,
+ t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.blocked,
+ t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.need_qs);
local_irq_restore(flags);
return;
}
--
1.8.1.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-03 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-03 17:03 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/12] Miscellaneous fixes for v4.1 Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/12] rcu: Consolidate rcu_synchronize and wakeme_after_rcu() Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/12] rcu_tree: Avoid touching rnp->completed when a new GP is started Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/12] rcu: Fix a couple of typos in rcu_all_qs() comment header Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/12] rcu: Drive PROVE_RCU directly off of PROVE_LOCKING Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/12] rcu: Remove CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT from tree.c file Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/12] rcu: Use IS_ENABLED() to simplify rcu_bootup_announce_oddness() Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/12] rcu: Add boot-up check for non-default CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF values Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/12] rcu: Reverse rcu_dereference_check() conditions Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/12] torture: Avoid script syntax error when insufficient CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/12] rcu: Get rcu_sched_force_quiescent_state() where it belongs Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-03 17:03 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/12] rcu: Remove redundant check of cpu_online() Paul E. McKenney
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=1425402235-11061-6-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--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®