mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: cgroup: deadlock between cpu_hotplug_lock and freezer_mutex
       [not found] <20230215072501.3764-1-hdanton@sina.com>
@ 2023-02-15 10:36 ` Xiubo Li
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Xiubo Li @ 2023-02-15 10:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Hillf Danton; +Cc: tj, hannes, cgroups, linux-mm, linux-kernel

Hi Hillf,

On 15/02/2023 15:25, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 10:07:23 +0800 Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>
>> Hi
>>
>> Recently when running some test cases for ceph we hit the following
>> deadlock issue in cgroup code. Has this been fixed ? I have checked the
>> latest code and it seems no any commit is fixing this.
>>
>> This call trace could also be found in
>> https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/58564#note-4, which is more friendly to
>> read.
>>
>>    ======================================================
>>    WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>>    6.1.0-rc5-ceph-gc90f64b588ff #1 Tainted: G S
>>    ------------------------------------------------------
>>    runc/90769 is trying to acquire lock:
>>    ffffffff82664cb0 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at:
>> static_key_slow_inc+0xe/0x20
>>    #012but task is already holding lock:
>>    ffffffff8276e468 (freezer_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: freezer_write+0x89/0x530
>>    #012which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>    #012the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>>    #012-> #2 (freezer_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
>>          __mutex_lock+0x9c/0xf20
>>          freezer_attach+0x2c/0xf0
>>          cgroup_migrate_execute+0x3f3/0x4c0
>>          cgroup_attach_task+0x22e/0x3e0
>>          __cgroup1_procs_write.constprop.12+0xfb/0x140
>>          cgroup_file_write+0x91/0x230
>>          kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x137/0x1d0
>>          vfs_write+0x344/0x4d0
>>          ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
>>          do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
>>          entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
>>    #012-> #1 (cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem){++++}-{0:0}:
>>          percpu_down_write+0x45/0x2c0
>>          cgroup_procs_write_start+0x84/0x270
>>          __cgroup1_procs_write.constprop.12+0x57/0x140
>>          cgroup_file_write+0x91/0x230
>>          kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x137/0x1d0
>>          vfs_write+0x344/0x4d0
>>          ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
>>          do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
>>          entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
>>    #012-> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
>>          __lock_acquire+0x103f/0x1de0
>>          lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2f0
>>          cpus_read_lock+0x3c/0xd0
>>          static_key_slow_inc+0xe/0x20
>>          freezer_apply_state+0x98/0xb0
>>          freezer_write+0x307/0x530
>>          cgroup_file_write+0x91/0x230
>>          kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x137/0x1d0
>>          vfs_write+0x344/0x4d0
>>          ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
>>          do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
>>          entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
>>    #012other info that might help us debug this:
>>    Chain exists of:#012  cpu_hotplug_lock --> cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem
>> --> freezer_mutex
>>    Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>          CPU0                    CPU1
>>          ----                    ----
>>     lock(freezer_mutex);
>>                                  lock(cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem);
>>                                  lock(freezer_mutex);
>>     lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
>>    #012 *** DEADLOCK ***
> Thanks for your report.
>
> Change locking order if it is impossible to update freezer_active in atomic manner.
>
> Only for thoughts.

Sure, I will test this.

Thanks


>
> Hillf
> +++ linux-6.1.3/kernel/cgroup/legacy_freezer.c
> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void freezer_apply_state(struct f
>   
>   	if (freeze) {
>   		if (!(freezer->state & CGROUP_FREEZING))
> -			static_branch_inc(&freezer_active);
> +			static_branch_inc_cpuslocked(&freezer_active);
>   		freezer->state |= state;
>   		freeze_cgroup(freezer);
>   	} else {
> @@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ static void freezer_apply_state(struct f
>   		if (!(freezer->state & CGROUP_FREEZING)) {
>   			freezer->state &= ~CGROUP_FROZEN;
>   			if (was_freezing)
> -				static_branch_dec(&freezer_active);
> +				static_branch_dec_cpuslocked(&freezer_active);
>   			unfreeze_cgroup(freezer);
>   		}
>   	}
> @@ -379,6 +379,7 @@ static void freezer_change_state(struct
>   {
>   	struct cgroup_subsys_state *pos;
>   
> +	cpus_read_lock();
>   	/*
>   	 * Update all its descendants in pre-order traversal.  Each
>   	 * descendant will try to inherit its parent's FREEZING state as
> @@ -407,6 +408,7 @@ static void freezer_change_state(struct
>   	}
>   	rcu_read_unlock();
>   	mutex_unlock(&freezer_mutex);
> +	cpus_read_unlock();
>   }
>   
>   static ssize_t freezer_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
>
-- 
Best Regards,

Xiubo Li (李秀波)

Email: xiubli@redhat.com/xiubli@ibm.com
Slack: @Xiubo Li


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* cgroup: deadlock between cpu_hotplug_lock and freezer_mutex
@ 2023-02-15  2:07 Xiubo Li
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Xiubo Li @ 2023-02-15  2:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: tj, lizefan.x, hannes, cgroups; +Cc: linux-kernel

Hi

Recently when running some test cases for ceph we hit the following 
deadlock issue in cgroup code. Has this been fixed ? I have checked the 
latest code and it seems no any commit is fixing this.

This call trace could also be found in 
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/58564#note-4, which is more friendly to 
read.

  ======================================================
  WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
  6.1.0-rc5-ceph-gc90f64b588ff #1 Tainted: G S
  ------------------------------------------------------
  runc/90769 is trying to acquire lock:
  ffffffff82664cb0 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: 
static_key_slow_inc+0xe/0x20
  #012but task is already holding lock:
  ffffffff8276e468 (freezer_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: freezer_write+0x89/0x530
  #012which lock already depends on the new lock.
  #012the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
  #012-> #2 (freezer_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
        __mutex_lock+0x9c/0xf20
        freezer_attach+0x2c/0xf0
        cgroup_migrate_execute+0x3f3/0x4c0
        cgroup_attach_task+0x22e/0x3e0
        __cgroup1_procs_write.constprop.12+0xfb/0x140
        cgroup_file_write+0x91/0x230
        kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x137/0x1d0
        vfs_write+0x344/0x4d0
        ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
        do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
        entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
  #012-> #1 (cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem){++++}-{0:0}:
        percpu_down_write+0x45/0x2c0
        cgroup_procs_write_start+0x84/0x270
        __cgroup1_procs_write.constprop.12+0x57/0x140
        cgroup_file_write+0x91/0x230
        kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x137/0x1d0
        vfs_write+0x344/0x4d0
        ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
        do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
        entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
  #012-> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
        __lock_acquire+0x103f/0x1de0
        lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2f0
        cpus_read_lock+0x3c/0xd0
        static_key_slow_inc+0xe/0x20
        freezer_apply_state+0x98/0xb0
        freezer_write+0x307/0x530
        cgroup_file_write+0x91/0x230
        kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x137/0x1d0
        vfs_write+0x344/0x4d0
        ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
        do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
        entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
  #012other info that might help us debug this:
  Chain exists of:#012  cpu_hotplug_lock --> cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem 
--> freezer_mutex
  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
        CPU0                    CPU1
        ----                    ----
   lock(freezer_mutex);
                                lock(cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem);
                                lock(freezer_mutex);
   lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
  #012 *** DEADLOCK ***
  5 locks held by runc/90769:
  #0: ffff88810bd064e8 (&f->f_pos_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: 
__fdget_pos+0x44/0x50
  #1: ffff88817f828448 (sb_writers#6){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
  #2: ffff888104cf5688 (&of->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: 
kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x104/0x1d0
  #3: ffff888107f885f0 (kn->active#170){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: 
kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x10d/0x1d0
  #4: ffffffff8276e468 (freezer_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: 
freezer_write+0x89/0x530
  #012stack backtrace:
  CPU: 3 PID: 90769 Comm: runc Tainted: G S 6.1.0-rc5-ceph-gc90f64b588ff #1
  Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-5018R-WR/X10SRW-F, BIOS 1.0c 09/07/2015
  Call Trace:
  <TASK>
  dump_stack_lvl+0x55/0x6d
  check_noncircular+0xfe/0x110
  ? __lock_acquire+0xec6/0x1de0
  __lock_acquire+0x103f/0x1de0
  lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2f0
  ? static_key_slow_inc+0xe/0x20
  ? freezer_write+0x1c6/0x530
  cpus_read_lock+0x3c/0xd0
  ? static_key_slow_inc+0xe/0x20
  static_key_slow_inc+0xe/0x20
  freezer_apply_state+0x98/0xb0
  freezer_write+0x307/0x530
  cgroup_file_write+0x91/0x230
  kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x137/0x1d0
  vfs_write+0x344/0x4d0
  ksys_write+0x5c/0xd0
  do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
  RIP: 0033:0x558e89efab9b
  Code: e8 8a 2e fb ff eb 88 cc cc cc cc cc cc cc cc e8 7b 74 fb ff 48 
8b 7c 24 10 48 8b 74 24 18 48 8b 54 24 20 48 8b 44 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 
01 f0 ff ff 76 20 48 c7 44 24 28 ff ff ff ff 48 c7 44 24 30
  RSP: 002b:000000c00019c010 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000001
  RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 000000c000031000 RCX: 0000558e89efab9b
  RDX: 0000000000000006 RSI: 000000c00019c1c8 RDI: 000000000000000d
  RBP: 000000c00019c060 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 000000c00028ed20
  R10: 0000000000000006 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 000000c00019c0f0
  R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 000000c0000001a0 R15: 00007f38d2e1476c
  </TASK>

Thanks

-- 
Best Regards,

Xiubo Li (李秀波)

Email: xiubli@redhat.com/xiubli@ibm.com
Slack: @Xiubo Li


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2023-02-15 10:37 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <20230215072501.3764-1-hdanton@sina.com>
2023-02-15 10:36 ` cgroup: deadlock between cpu_hotplug_lock and freezer_mutex Xiubo Li
2023-02-15  2:07 Xiubo Li

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®