Re: [ BUG: Invalid wait context ] rtc_lock at: mc146818_avoid_UIP

["Mateusz Jończyk" <mat.jonczyk@o2.pl>]

W dniu 3.04.2025 o 15:12, Thomas Gleixner pisze:
> On Sun, Mar 30 2025 at 13:32, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> while playing with suspend to RAM, I got this lockdep splat below.
>>
>> Poking around I found:
>>
>> ec5895c0f2d8 ("rtc: mc146818-lib: extract mc146818_avoid_UIP")
>>
>> which is doing this funky taking and dropping the rtc_lock and I guess that's
>> inherited from ye olde times.
>>
>> I "fixed" it so lockdeup doesn't warn by converting rtc_lock to a raw spinlock
>> but this is definitely not the right fix so let me bounce it off to the folks
>> on Cc who might have a better idea perhaps...
> Converting it to a raw lock "fixes" the problem, but RT people will hunt
> you down with a big latency bat.
>
> But this is not related to the commit above and not new.
>
> timekeeping_suspend() has always invoked mach_get_cmos_time() with the
> freeze lock held and mc146818_get_time() has always locked rtc_lock.
>
> I wonder, why this splat hasn't popped before. On RT lockdep should have
> complained forever. Sebastian???

Hello,

I was able to trigger the bug on Linux 6.1.0 with
CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING enabled and I suspect it can be
triggered much earlier.

It is likely that only after

commit 560af5dc839eef ("lockdep: Enable PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING with PROVE_LOCKING.")

people are seeing this simply because no one previously did
the test with CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING=y.

See https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAP-bSRZ0CWyZZsMtx046YV8L28LhY0fson2g4EqcwRAVN1Jk+Q@mail.gmail.com/ :

> This splat happens on suspend/resume on a HP laptop. It doesn't appear
> to be a recent regression, as a bisect only leads to 560af5dc839e
> ("lockdep: Enable PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING with PROVE_LOCKING.") -

Ccing Chris Bainbridge <chris.bainbridge@gmail.com>, author of the 
previous bug report.

Greetings,

Mateusz