* [PATCH] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex
@ 2024-11-14 19:00 John Stultz
2024-11-15 12:06 ` Juri Lelli
2024-12-02 11:14 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for John Stultz
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: John Stultz @ 2024-11-14 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML
Cc: John Stultz, Peter Zijlstra, Joel Fernandes, Qais Yousef,
Ingo Molnar, Juri Lelli, Vincent Guittot, Dietmar Eggemann,
Valentin Schneider, Steven Rostedt, Benjamin Segall,
Zimuzo Ezeozue, Mel Gorman, Will Deacon, Waiman Long, Boqun Feng,
Paul E. McKenney, Metin Kaya, Xuewen Yan, K Prateek Nayak,
Thomas Gleixner, Daniel Lezcano, kernel-team, Davidlohr Bueso,
regressions, Thorsten Leemhuis, Anders Roxell, Arnd Bergmann
Anders had bisected a crash using PREEMPT_RT with linux-next and
isolated it down to commit 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove
wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock"), where it seemed the
wake_q structure was somehow getting corrupted causing a null
pointer traversal.
I was able to easily repoduce this with PREEMPT_RT and managed
to isolate down that through various call stacks we were
actually calling wake_up_q() twice on the same wake_q.
I found that in the problematic commit, I had added the
wake_up_q() call in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() around
__ww_mutex_add_waiter(), following a similar pattern in
__mutex_lock_common().
However, its just wrong. We haven't dropped the lock->wait_lock,
so its contrary to the point of the original patch. And it
didn't match the __mutex_lock_common() logic of re-initializing
the wake_q after calling it midway in the stack.
Looking at it now, the wake_up_q() call is incorrect and should
just be removed. So drop the erronious logic I had added.
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Cc: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Benjamin Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Cc: Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Metin Kaya <Metin.Kaya@arm.com>
Cc: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@gmail.com>
Cc: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: regressions@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
Cc: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Fixes: 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock")
Reported-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6afb936f-17c7-43fa-90e0-b9e780866097@app.fastmail.com/
Tested-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index c7de80ee1f9d..a01e81179df0 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1248,10 +1248,7 @@ static int __sched task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
/* Check whether the waiter should back out immediately */
rtm = container_of(lock, struct rt_mutex, rtmutex);
- preempt_disable();
res = __ww_mutex_add_waiter(waiter, rtm, ww_ctx, wake_q);
- wake_up_q(wake_q);
- preempt_enable();
if (res) {
raw_spin_lock(&task->pi_lock);
rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
--
2.47.0.338.g60cca15819-goog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex
2024-11-14 19:00 [PATCH] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex John Stultz
@ 2024-11-15 12:06 ` Juri Lelli
2024-12-02 11:14 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for John Stultz
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Juri Lelli @ 2024-11-15 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Stultz
Cc: LKML, Peter Zijlstra, Joel Fernandes, Qais Yousef, Ingo Molnar,
Vincent Guittot, Dietmar Eggemann, Valentin Schneider,
Steven Rostedt, Benjamin Segall, Zimuzo Ezeozue, Mel Gorman,
Will Deacon, Waiman Long, Boqun Feng, Paul E. McKenney,
Metin Kaya, Xuewen Yan, K Prateek Nayak, Thomas Gleixner,
Daniel Lezcano, kernel-team, Davidlohr Bueso, regressions,
Thorsten Leemhuis, Anders Roxell, Arnd Bergmann
Hi John,
On 14/11/24 11:00, John Stultz wrote:
> Anders had bisected a crash using PREEMPT_RT with linux-next and
> isolated it down to commit 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove
> wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock"), where it seemed the
> wake_q structure was somehow getting corrupted causing a null
> pointer traversal.
>
> I was able to easily repoduce this with PREEMPT_RT and managed
> to isolate down that through various call stacks we were
> actually calling wake_up_q() twice on the same wake_q.
>
> I found that in the problematic commit, I had added the
> wake_up_q() call in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() around
> __ww_mutex_add_waiter(), following a similar pattern in
> __mutex_lock_common().
>
> However, its just wrong. We haven't dropped the lock->wait_lock,
> so its contrary to the point of the original patch. And it
> didn't match the __mutex_lock_common() logic of re-initializing
> the wake_q after calling it midway in the stack.
>
> Looking at it now, the wake_up_q() call is incorrect and should
> just be removed. So drop the erronious logic I had added.
>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
> Cc: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
> Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> Cc: Benjamin Segall <bsegall@google.com>
> Cc: Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@google.com>
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
> Cc: Metin Kaya <Metin.Kaya@arm.com>
> Cc: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@gmail.com>
> Cc: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> Cc: kernel-team@android.com
> Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
> Cc: regressions@lists.linux.dev
> Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
> Cc: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
> Fixes: 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock")
> Reported-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
> Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6afb936f-17c7-43fa-90e0-b9e780866097@app.fastmail.com/
> Tested-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
> Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
> ---
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Best,
Juri
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [tip: sched/core] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex
2024-11-14 19:00 [PATCH] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex John Stultz
2024-11-15 12:06 ` Juri Lelli
@ 2024-12-02 11:14 ` tip-bot2 for John Stultz
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: tip-bot2 for John Stultz @ 2024-12-02 11:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-tip-commits
Cc: Anders Roxell, Arnd Bergmann, John Stultz, Peter Zijlstra (Intel),
Juri Lelli, K Prateek Nayak, x86, linux-kernel
The following commit has been merged into the sched/core branch of tip:
Commit-ID: 82f9cc094975240885c93effbca7f4603f5de1bf
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/82f9cc094975240885c93effbca7f4603f5de1bf
Author: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
AuthorDate: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 11:00:47 -08:00
Committer: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
CommitterDate: Mon, 02 Dec 2024 12:01:29 +01:00
locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex
Anders had bisected a crash using PREEMPT_RT with linux-next and
isolated it down to commit 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove
wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock"), where it seemed the
wake_q structure was somehow getting corrupted causing a null
pointer traversal.
I was able to easily repoduce this with PREEMPT_RT and managed
to isolate down that through various call stacks we were
actually calling wake_up_q() twice on the same wake_q.
I found that in the problematic commit, I had added the
wake_up_q() call in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() around
__ww_mutex_add_waiter(), following a similar pattern in
__mutex_lock_common().
However, its just wrong. We haven't dropped the lock->wait_lock,
so its contrary to the point of the original patch. And it
didn't match the __mutex_lock_common() logic of re-initializing
the wake_q after calling it midway in the stack.
Looking at it now, the wake_up_q() call is incorrect and should
just be removed. So drop the erronious logic I had added.
Fixes: 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock")
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6afb936f-17c7-43fa-90e0-b9e780866097@app.fastmail.com/
Reported-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241114190051.552665-1-jstultz@google.com
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index ac1365a..e858de2 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1248,10 +1248,7 @@ static int __sched task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
/* Check whether the waiter should back out immediately */
rtm = container_of(lock, struct rt_mutex, rtmutex);
- preempt_disable();
res = __ww_mutex_add_waiter(waiter, rtm, ww_ctx, wake_q);
- wake_up_q(wake_q);
- preempt_enable();
if (res) {
raw_spin_lock(&task->pi_lock);
rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-12-02 11:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-11-14 19:00 [PATCH] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex John Stultz
2024-11-15 12:06 ` Juri Lelli
2024-12-02 11:14 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for John Stultz
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®