From: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/semaphore: Use wake_q to wake up processes outside lock critical section
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 21:21:15 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b6a32f9c-d991-408e-a80e-9a34afb23197@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250122191742.3025187-1-longman@redhat.com>
On 1/22/25 2:17 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> A circular lock dependency splat has been seen involving down_trylock().
>
> [ 4011.795602] ======================================================
> [ 4011.795603] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 4011.795607] 6.12.0-41.el10.s390x+debug
> [ 4011.795612] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 4011.795613] dd/32479 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 4011.795617] 0015a20accd0d4f8 ((console_sem).lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: down_trylock+0x26/0x90
> [ 4011.795636]
> [ 4011.795636] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 4011.795637] 000000017e461698 (&zone->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: rmqueue_bulk+0xac/0x8f0
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> -> #4 (&zone->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> -> #3 (hrtimer_bases.lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> -> #2 (&rq->__lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> -> #1 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> -> #0 ((console_sem).lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
>
> The console_sem -> pi_lock dependency is due to calling try_to_wake_up()
> while holding the console.sem raw_spinlock. This dependency can be broken
> by using wake_q to do the wakeup instead of calling try_to_wake_up()
> under the console_sem lock. This will also make the semaphore's
> raw_spinlock become a terminal lock without taking any further locks
> underneath it.
>
> The hrtimer_bases.lock -> zone->lock dependency is actually another
> instance of raw_spinlock to spinlock nesting problem.
>
> [ 4011.795646] -> #4 (&zone->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 4011.795650] __lock_acquire+0xe86/0x1cc0
> [ 4011.795655] lock_acquire.part.0+0x258/0x630
> [ 4011.795657] lock_acquire+0xb8/0xe0
> [ 4011.795659] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xb4/0x120
> [ 4011.795663] rmqueue_bulk+0xac/0x8f0
> [ 4011.795665] __rmqueue_pcplist+0x580/0x830
> [ 4011.795667] rmqueue_pcplist+0xfc/0x470
> [ 4011.795669] rmqueue.isra.0+0xdec/0x11b0
> [ 4011.795671] get_page_from_freelist+0x2ee/0xeb0
> [ 4011.795673] __alloc_pages_noprof+0x2c2/0x520
> [ 4011.795676] alloc_pages_mpol_noprof+0x1fc/0x4d0
> [ 4011.795681] alloc_pages_noprof+0x8c/0xe0
> [ 4011.795684] allocate_slab+0x320/0x460
> [ 4011.795686] ___slab_alloc+0xa58/0x12b0
> [ 4011.795688] __slab_alloc.isra.0+0x42/0x60
> [ 4011.795690] kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x304/0x350
> [ 4011.795692] fill_pool+0xf6/0x450
> [ 4011.795697] debug_object_activate+0xfe/0x360
> [ 4011.795700] enqueue_hrtimer+0x34/0x190
> [ 4011.795703] __run_hrtimer+0x3c8/0x4c0
> [ 4011.795705] __hrtimer_run_queues+0x1b2/0x260
> [ 4011.795707] hrtimer_interrupt+0x316/0x760
> [ 4011.795709] do_IRQ+0x9a/0xe0
> [ 4011.795712] do_irq_async+0xf6/0x160
>
> We will need to make some changes in debugobjects and/or hrtimer code
> to address this problem and break the circular dependency.
I check the v6.12 debugobjects code again and I saw
static void debug_objects_fill_pool(void)
{
/*
* On RT enabled kernels the pool refill must happen in preemptible
* context -- for !RT kernels we rely on the fact that
spinlock_t and
* raw_spinlock_t are basically the same type and this lock-type
* inversion works just fine.
*/
if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) || preemptible()) {
/*
* Annotate away the spinlock_t inside raw_spinlock_t
warning
* by temporarily raising the wait-type to WAIT_SLEEP,
matching
* the preemptible() condition above.
*/
static DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(fill_pool_map,
LD_WAIT_SLEEP);
lock_map_acquire_try(&fill_pool_map);
fill_pool();
lock_map_release(&fill_pool_map);
}
}
It looks like it explicitly allows raw_spinlock to spinlock nesting for
non-PREEMPT_RT kernel and disable the lockdep nested locking check. So
the hrtimer_bases.lock -> zone->lock dependency is legit and expected. I
will need to update my patch description again.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-26 2:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-22 19:17 Waiman Long
2025-01-26 2:21 ` Waiman Long [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-09-09 19:28 Waiman Long
2022-09-19 19:49 ` Waiman Long
2023-09-21 0:05 ` John Stultz
2023-09-21 0:37 ` Waiman Long
2023-09-21 7:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-09-21 7:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-09-22 18:45 ` Waiman Long
2023-09-22 19:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-09-23 0:29 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-10 18:10 Waiman Long
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=b6a32f9c-d991-408e-a80e-9a34afb23197@redhat.com \
--to=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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®