From: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>
To: yuzenghui <yuzenghui@huawei.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: "Wanghaibin \(D\)" <wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com>,
"Zhuangyuzeng \(Yisen\)" <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>
Subject: RE: [REPORT] possible circular locking dependency when booting a VM on arm64 host
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 10:54:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <134ee452eda74f0cbdc10354fe66c48e@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7225eba7-6e5e-ec7e-953b-d1fef0b1775b@huawei.com>
Hi Yuzenghui,
I will try to reproduce it today at our platform. Just one question is it easily
reproducible or is a rare occurrence?
Thanks
Salil
> From: yuzenghui
> Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 11:41 AM
> To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>; Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>; Linux
> Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>;
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: Zhuangyuzeng (Yisen) <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>; Salil Mehta
> <salil.mehta@huawei.com>; Wanghaibin (D) <wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com>
> Subject: [REPORT] possible circular locking dependency when booting a VM on arm64
> host
>
> Hi All,
>
> I had seen the following lockdep splat when booting a guest on my
> Kunpeng 920 with GICv4 enabled. I can also trigger the same splat
> on v5.5 so it should already exist in the kernel for a while. I'm
> not sure what the exact problem is and hope someone can have a look!
>
>
> Thanks,
> Zenghui
>
> [ 103.855511] ======================================================
> [ 103.861664] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 103.867817] 5.8.0-rc4+ #35 Tainted: G W
> [ 103.872932] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 103.879083] CPU 2/KVM/20515 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 103.884200] ffff202fcd5865b0 (&irq_desc_lock_class){-.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> __irq_get_desc_lock+0x60/0xa0
> [ 103.893127]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 103.898933] ffff202fcfd07f58 (&rq->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> __schedule+0x114/0x8b8
> [ 103.906301]
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> [ 103.914441]
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 103.921888]
> -> #3 (&rq->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 103.927438] _raw_spin_lock+0x54/0x70
> [ 103.931605] task_fork_fair+0x48/0x150
> [ 103.935860] sched_fork+0x100/0x268
> [ 103.939856] copy_process+0x628/0x1868
> [ 103.944106] _do_fork+0x74/0x710
> [ 103.947840] kernel_thread+0x78/0xa0
> [ 103.951917] rest_init+0x30/0x270
> [ 103.955742] arch_call_rest_init+0x14/0x1c
> [ 103.960339] start_kernel+0x534/0x568
> [ 103.964503]
> -> #2 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 103.970224] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x70/0x98
> [ 103.975080] try_to_wake_up+0x5c/0x5b0
> [ 103.979330] wake_up_process+0x28/0x38
> [ 103.983581] create_worker+0x128/0x1b8
> [ 103.987834] workqueue_init+0x308/0x3bc
> [ 103.992172] kernel_init_freeable+0x180/0x33c
> [ 103.997027] kernel_init+0x18/0x118
> [ 104.001020] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
> [ 104.005097]
> -> #1 (&pool->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 104.010817] _raw_spin_lock+0x54/0x70
> [ 104.014983] __queue_work+0x120/0x6e8
> [ 104.019146] queue_work_on+0xa0/0xd8
> [ 104.023225] irq_set_affinity_locked+0xa8/0x178
> [ 104.028253] __irq_set_affinity+0x5c/0x90
> [ 104.032762] irq_set_affinity_hint+0x74/0xb0
> [ 104.037540] hns3_nic_init_irq+0xe0/0x210 [hns3]
> [ 104.042655] hns3_client_init+0x2d8/0x4e0 [hns3]
> [ 104.047779] hclge_init_client_instance+0xf0/0x3a8 [hclge]
> [ 104.053760] hnae3_init_client_instance.part.3+0x30/0x68 [hnae3]
> [ 104.060257] hnae3_register_ae_dev+0x100/0x1f0 [hnae3]
> [ 104.065892] hns3_probe+0x60/0xa8 [hns3]
> [ 104.070319] local_pci_probe+0x44/0x98
> [ 104.074573] work_for_cpu_fn+0x20/0x30
> [ 104.078823] process_one_work+0x258/0x618
> [ 104.083333] worker_thread+0x1c0/0x438
> [ 104.087585] kthread+0x120/0x128
> [ 104.091318] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
> [ 104.095394]
> -> #0 (&irq_desc_lock_class){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 104.101895] __lock_acquire+0x11bc/0x1530
> [ 104.106406] lock_acquire+0x100/0x3f8
> [ 104.110570] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x70/0x98
> [ 104.115426] __irq_get_desc_lock+0x60/0xa0
> [ 104.120021] irq_set_vcpu_affinity+0x48/0xc8
> [ 104.124793] its_make_vpe_non_resident+0x6c/0xc0
> [ 104.129910] vgic_v4_put+0x64/0x70
> [ 104.133815] vgic_v3_put+0x28/0x100
> [ 104.137806] kvm_vgic_put+0x3c/0x60
> [ 104.141801] kvm_arch_vcpu_put+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.146228] kvm_sched_out+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.150306] __schedule+0x554/0x8b8
> [ 104.154298] schedule+0x50/0xe0
> [ 104.157946] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x644/0x9e8
> [ 104.163063] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x4b4/0x918
> [ 104.167403] ksys_ioctl+0xb4/0xd0
> [ 104.171222] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x28/0xc8
> [ 104.175647] el0_svc_common.constprop.2+0x74/0x138
> [ 104.180935] do_el0_svc+0x34/0xa0
> [ 104.184755] el0_sync_handler+0xec/0x128
> [ 104.189179] el0_sync+0x140/0x180
> [ 104.192997]
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> [ 104.200962] Chain exists of:
> &irq_desc_lock_class --> &p->pi_lock --> &rq->lock
>
> [ 104.211261] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 104.217152] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 104.221660] ---- ----
> [ 104.226170] lock(&rq->lock);
> [ 104.229210] lock(&p->pi_lock);
> [ 104.234930] lock(&rq->lock);
> [ 104.240474] lock(&irq_desc_lock_class);
> [ 104.244465]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 104.250356] 2 locks held by CPU 2/KVM/20515:
> [ 104.254606] #0: ffff202fa95680c8 (&vcpu->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
> kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x80/0x918
> [ 104.262921] #1: ffff202fcfd07f58 (&rq->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> __schedule+0x114/0x8b8
> [ 104.270717]
> stack backtrace:
> [ 104.275057] CPU: 73 PID: 20515 Comm: CPU 2/KVM Kdump: loaded Tainted:
> G W 5.8.0-rc4+ #35
> [ 104.284404] Hardware name: Huawei TaiShan 2280 V2/BC82AMDDA, BIOS
> 1.05 09/18/2019
> [ 104.291851] Call trace:
> [ 104.294289] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x218
> [ 104.297935] show_stack+0x2c/0x38
> [ 104.301235] dump_stack+0xf0/0x168
> [ 104.304622] print_circular_bug.isra.39+0x22c/0x280
> [ 104.309476] check_noncircular+0x158/0x1c8
> [ 104.313555] __lock_acquire+0x11bc/0x1530
> [ 104.317545] lock_acquire+0x100/0x3f8
> [ 104.321190] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x70/0x98
> [ 104.325529] __irq_get_desc_lock+0x60/0xa0
> [ 104.329606] irq_set_vcpu_affinity+0x48/0xc8
> [ 104.333858] its_make_vpe_non_resident+0x6c/0xc0
> [ 104.338454] vgic_v4_put+0x64/0x70
> [ 104.341840] vgic_v3_put+0x28/0x100
> [ 104.345314] kvm_vgic_put+0x3c/0x60
> [ 104.348789] kvm_arch_vcpu_put+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.352694] kvm_sched_out+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.356256] __schedule+0x554/0x8b8
> [ 104.359730] schedule+0x50/0xe0
> [ 104.362859] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x644/0x9e8
> [ 104.367457] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x4b4/0x918
> [ 104.371277] ksys_ioctl+0xb4/0xd0
> [ 104.374577] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x28/0xc8
> [ 104.378482] el0_svc_common.constprop.2+0x74/0x138
> [ 104.383250] do_el0_svc+0x34/0xa0
> [ 104.386552] el0_sync_handler+0xec/0x128
> [ 104.390458] el0_sync+0x140/0x180
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>
To: yuzenghui <yuzenghui@huawei.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: "Zhuangyuzeng (Yisen)" <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>,
"Wanghaibin (D)" <wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com>
Subject: RE: [REPORT] possible circular locking dependency when booting a VM on arm64 host
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 10:54:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <134ee452eda74f0cbdc10354fe66c48e@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7225eba7-6e5e-ec7e-953b-d1fef0b1775b@huawei.com>
Hi Yuzenghui,
I will try to reproduce it today at our platform. Just one question is it easily
reproducible or is a rare occurrence?
Thanks
Salil
> From: yuzenghui
> Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 11:41 AM
> To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>; Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>; Linux
> Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>;
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: Zhuangyuzeng (Yisen) <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>; Salil Mehta
> <salil.mehta@huawei.com>; Wanghaibin (D) <wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com>
> Subject: [REPORT] possible circular locking dependency when booting a VM on arm64
> host
>
> Hi All,
>
> I had seen the following lockdep splat when booting a guest on my
> Kunpeng 920 with GICv4 enabled. I can also trigger the same splat
> on v5.5 so it should already exist in the kernel for a while. I'm
> not sure what the exact problem is and hope someone can have a look!
>
>
> Thanks,
> Zenghui
>
> [ 103.855511] ======================================================
> [ 103.861664] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 103.867817] 5.8.0-rc4+ #35 Tainted: G W
> [ 103.872932] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 103.879083] CPU 2/KVM/20515 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 103.884200] ffff202fcd5865b0 (&irq_desc_lock_class){-.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> __irq_get_desc_lock+0x60/0xa0
> [ 103.893127]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 103.898933] ffff202fcfd07f58 (&rq->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> __schedule+0x114/0x8b8
> [ 103.906301]
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> [ 103.914441]
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 103.921888]
> -> #3 (&rq->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 103.927438] _raw_spin_lock+0x54/0x70
> [ 103.931605] task_fork_fair+0x48/0x150
> [ 103.935860] sched_fork+0x100/0x268
> [ 103.939856] copy_process+0x628/0x1868
> [ 103.944106] _do_fork+0x74/0x710
> [ 103.947840] kernel_thread+0x78/0xa0
> [ 103.951917] rest_init+0x30/0x270
> [ 103.955742] arch_call_rest_init+0x14/0x1c
> [ 103.960339] start_kernel+0x534/0x568
> [ 103.964503]
> -> #2 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 103.970224] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x70/0x98
> [ 103.975080] try_to_wake_up+0x5c/0x5b0
> [ 103.979330] wake_up_process+0x28/0x38
> [ 103.983581] create_worker+0x128/0x1b8
> [ 103.987834] workqueue_init+0x308/0x3bc
> [ 103.992172] kernel_init_freeable+0x180/0x33c
> [ 103.997027] kernel_init+0x18/0x118
> [ 104.001020] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
> [ 104.005097]
> -> #1 (&pool->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 104.010817] _raw_spin_lock+0x54/0x70
> [ 104.014983] __queue_work+0x120/0x6e8
> [ 104.019146] queue_work_on+0xa0/0xd8
> [ 104.023225] irq_set_affinity_locked+0xa8/0x178
> [ 104.028253] __irq_set_affinity+0x5c/0x90
> [ 104.032762] irq_set_affinity_hint+0x74/0xb0
> [ 104.037540] hns3_nic_init_irq+0xe0/0x210 [hns3]
> [ 104.042655] hns3_client_init+0x2d8/0x4e0 [hns3]
> [ 104.047779] hclge_init_client_instance+0xf0/0x3a8 [hclge]
> [ 104.053760] hnae3_init_client_instance.part.3+0x30/0x68 [hnae3]
> [ 104.060257] hnae3_register_ae_dev+0x100/0x1f0 [hnae3]
> [ 104.065892] hns3_probe+0x60/0xa8 [hns3]
> [ 104.070319] local_pci_probe+0x44/0x98
> [ 104.074573] work_for_cpu_fn+0x20/0x30
> [ 104.078823] process_one_work+0x258/0x618
> [ 104.083333] worker_thread+0x1c0/0x438
> [ 104.087585] kthread+0x120/0x128
> [ 104.091318] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
> [ 104.095394]
> -> #0 (&irq_desc_lock_class){-.-.}-{2:2}:
> [ 104.101895] __lock_acquire+0x11bc/0x1530
> [ 104.106406] lock_acquire+0x100/0x3f8
> [ 104.110570] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x70/0x98
> [ 104.115426] __irq_get_desc_lock+0x60/0xa0
> [ 104.120021] irq_set_vcpu_affinity+0x48/0xc8
> [ 104.124793] its_make_vpe_non_resident+0x6c/0xc0
> [ 104.129910] vgic_v4_put+0x64/0x70
> [ 104.133815] vgic_v3_put+0x28/0x100
> [ 104.137806] kvm_vgic_put+0x3c/0x60
> [ 104.141801] kvm_arch_vcpu_put+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.146228] kvm_sched_out+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.150306] __schedule+0x554/0x8b8
> [ 104.154298] schedule+0x50/0xe0
> [ 104.157946] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x644/0x9e8
> [ 104.163063] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x4b4/0x918
> [ 104.167403] ksys_ioctl+0xb4/0xd0
> [ 104.171222] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x28/0xc8
> [ 104.175647] el0_svc_common.constprop.2+0x74/0x138
> [ 104.180935] do_el0_svc+0x34/0xa0
> [ 104.184755] el0_sync_handler+0xec/0x128
> [ 104.189179] el0_sync+0x140/0x180
> [ 104.192997]
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> [ 104.200962] Chain exists of:
> &irq_desc_lock_class --> &p->pi_lock --> &rq->lock
>
> [ 104.211261] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 104.217152] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 104.221660] ---- ----
> [ 104.226170] lock(&rq->lock);
> [ 104.229210] lock(&p->pi_lock);
> [ 104.234930] lock(&rq->lock);
> [ 104.240474] lock(&irq_desc_lock_class);
> [ 104.244465]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 104.250356] 2 locks held by CPU 2/KVM/20515:
> [ 104.254606] #0: ffff202fa95680c8 (&vcpu->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
> kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x80/0x918
> [ 104.262921] #1: ffff202fcfd07f58 (&rq->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> __schedule+0x114/0x8b8
> [ 104.270717]
> stack backtrace:
> [ 104.275057] CPU: 73 PID: 20515 Comm: CPU 2/KVM Kdump: loaded Tainted:
> G W 5.8.0-rc4+ #35
> [ 104.284404] Hardware name: Huawei TaiShan 2280 V2/BC82AMDDA, BIOS
> 1.05 09/18/2019
> [ 104.291851] Call trace:
> [ 104.294289] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x218
> [ 104.297935] show_stack+0x2c/0x38
> [ 104.301235] dump_stack+0xf0/0x168
> [ 104.304622] print_circular_bug.isra.39+0x22c/0x280
> [ 104.309476] check_noncircular+0x158/0x1c8
> [ 104.313555] __lock_acquire+0x11bc/0x1530
> [ 104.317545] lock_acquire+0x100/0x3f8
> [ 104.321190] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x70/0x98
> [ 104.325529] __irq_get_desc_lock+0x60/0xa0
> [ 104.329606] irq_set_vcpu_affinity+0x48/0xc8
> [ 104.333858] its_make_vpe_non_resident+0x6c/0xc0
> [ 104.338454] vgic_v4_put+0x64/0x70
> [ 104.341840] vgic_v3_put+0x28/0x100
> [ 104.345314] kvm_vgic_put+0x3c/0x60
> [ 104.348789] kvm_arch_vcpu_put+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.352694] kvm_sched_out+0x38/0x58
> [ 104.356256] __schedule+0x554/0x8b8
> [ 104.359730] schedule+0x50/0xe0
> [ 104.362859] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x644/0x9e8
> [ 104.367457] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x4b4/0x918
> [ 104.371277] ksys_ioctl+0xb4/0xd0
> [ 104.374577] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x28/0xc8
> [ 104.378482] el0_svc_common.constprop.2+0x74/0x138
> [ 104.383250] do_el0_svc+0x34/0xa0
> [ 104.386552] el0_sync_handler+0xec/0x128
> [ 104.390458] el0_sync+0x140/0x180
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-09 10:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-09 10:41 [REPORT] possible circular locking dependency when booting a VM on arm64 host Zenghui Yu
2020-07-09 10:41 ` Zenghui Yu
2020-07-09 10:54 ` Salil Mehta [this message]
2020-07-09 10:54 ` Salil Mehta
2020-07-09 11:49 ` Zenghui Yu
2020-07-09 11:49 ` Zenghui Yu
2020-07-09 11:59 ` Salil Mehta
2020-07-09 11:59 ` Salil Mehta
2020-07-15 16:08 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-07-15 16:08 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-07-16 0:58 ` Salil Mehta
2020-07-16 0:58 ` Salil Mehta
2020-07-16 8:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-07-16 8:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-07-16 8:14 ` Salil Mehta
2020-07-16 8:14 ` Salil Mehta
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=134ee452eda74f0cbdc10354fe66c48e@huawei.com \
--to=salil.mehta@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=yisen.zhuang@huawei.com \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.