All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Mark up obj->mm.lock for shrinker
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 11:10:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1477991431.3103.5.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161031124048.30355-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

On ma, 2016-10-31 at 12:40 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> As we may allocate from within the obj->mm.lock we may enter the
> shrinker for direct reclaim. Operating on the current object is
> prevented by checking for obj->mm.pages (which is only set as the last
> operation in the allocation path). However, we need to identity the
> single recursion of accessing another object's obj->mm.lock as the two
> locks have identical class and so appear to be the same to lockdep,
> convincing it that a deadlock is possible. Use mutex_lock_nested() to
> remove the false positive.
> 
> [ 2165.945734] =================================
> [ 2165.945749] [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> [ 2165.945765] 4.9.0-rc2+ #2 Tainted: G        W
> [ 2165.945781] ---------------------------------
> [ 2165.945796] inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} -> {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage.
> [ 2165.945816] kswapd0/62 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes: (&obj->mm.lock){+.+.?.}, at: [<ffffffffc0289a1f>] i915_gem_shrink+0x29f/0x500 [i915]
> [ 2165.945904] {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} state was registered at:
> [ 2165.945931] [<ffffffffb10bd50f>] mark_held_locks+0x6f/0xa0
> [ 2165.945956] [<ffffffffb10bf889>] lockdep_trace_alloc+0x69/0xc0
> [ 2165.945982] [<ffffffffb11eea53>] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x33/0x2a0
> [ 2165.946019] [<ffffffffc028a28a>] i915_gem_object_get_pages_stolen+0x6a/0xd0 [i915]
> [ 2165.946060] [<ffffffffc027e1d0>] ____i915_gem_object_get_pages+0x20/0x60 [i915]
> [ 2165.946098] [<ffffffffc027e268>] __i915_gem_object_get_pages+0x58/0x70 [i915]
> [ 2165.946138] [<ffffffffc028a3dc>] _i915_gem_object_create_stolen+0xec/0x120 [i915]
> [ 2165.946177] [<ffffffffc028af73>] i915_gem_object_create_stolen_for_preallocated+0xf3/0x3f0 [i915]
> [ 2165.946222] [<ffffffffc02bae43>] intel_alloc_initial_plane_obj.isra.125+0xd3/0x200 [i915]
> [ 2165.946266] [<ffffffffc02cb1c1>] intel_modeset_init+0x931/0x1530 [i915]
> [ 2165.946301] [<ffffffffc023d584>] i915_driver_load+0xa14/0x14a0 [i915]
> [ 2165.946335] [<ffffffffc0248aff>] i915_pci_probe+0x4f/0x70 [i915]
> [ 2165.946362] [<ffffffffb13cc452>] local_pci_probe+0x42/0xa0
> [ 2165.946386] [<ffffffffb13cd903>] pci_device_probe+0x103/0x150
> [ 2165.946411] [<ffffffffb14adeb3>] driver_probe_device+0x223/0x430
> [ 2165.946436] [<ffffffffb14ae1a3>] __driver_attach+0xe3/0xf0
> [ 2165.946461] [<ffffffffb14ab943>] bus_for_each_dev+0x73/0xc0
> [ 2165.946485] [<ffffffffb14ad5ee>] driver_attach+0x1e/0x20
> [ 2165.946508] [<ffffffffb14ad003>] bus_add_driver+0x173/0x270
> [ 2165.946533] [<ffffffffb14aee70>] driver_register+0x60/0xe0
> [ 2165.946557] [<ffffffffb13cbd6d>] __pci_register_driver+0x5d/0x60
> [ 2165.946606] [<ffffffffc0378057>] soundcore_open+0x17/0x230 [soundcore]
> [ 2165.946636] [<ffffffffb1000450>] do_one_initcall+0x50/0x180
> [ 2165.946661] [<ffffffffb117fd2d>] do_init_module+0x5f/0x1f1
> [ 2165.946685] [<ffffffffb1108964>] load_module+0x2174/0x2a80
> [ 2165.946709] [<ffffffffb11094df>] SYSC_finit_module+0xdf/0x110
> [ 2165.946734] [<ffffffffb110952e>] SyS_finit_module+0xe/0x10
> [ 2165.946758] [<ffffffffb1742aea>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xad
> [ 2165.946776] irq event stamp: 90871
> [ 2165.946788] hardirqs last  enabled at (90871):
> [ 2165.946805] [<ffffffffb173e9da>] __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x11a/0x1c0
> [ 2165.946823] hardirqs last disabled at (90870):
> [ 2165.946839] [<ffffffffb173e91b>] __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x5b/0x1c0
> [ 2165.946856] softirqs last  enabled at (90858):
> [ 2165.946872] [<ffffffffb174581a>] __do_softirq+0x39a/0x4c6
> [ 2165.946887] softirqs last disabled at (90671):
> [ 2165.946902] [<ffffffffb1066cea>] irq_exit+0xea/0xf0
> [ 2165.946916] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 2165.946936]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 2165.946955]        CPU0
> [ 2165.946965]        ----
> [ 2165.946975]   lock(&obj->mm.lock);
> [ 2165.947000]   <Interrupt>
> [ 2165.947010]     lock(&obj->mm.lock);
> [ 2165.947035] *** DEADLOCK ***
> [ 2165.947054] 2 locks held by kswapd0/62:
> [ 2165.947067]  #0: (shrinker_rwsem){++++..}, at: [<ffffffffb119a20e>] shrink_slab.part.40+0x5e/0x5d0
> [ 2165.947120]  #1: (&dev->struct_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffc028954b>] i915_gem_shrinker_lock+0x1b/0x60 [i915]
> [ 2165.948909] stack backtrace:
> [ 2165.950650] CPU: 2 PID: 62 Comm: kswapd0 Tainted: G        W 4.9.0-rc2+ #2
> [ 2165.951587] Hardware name: LENOVO 80MX/Lenovo E31-80, BIOS DCCN34WW(V2.03) 12/01/2015
> [ 2165.952484]  ffffc90000b5f8c8 ffffffffb137f645 ffff88016c5a2700 ffffffffb25f20a0
> [ 2165.953395]  ffffc90000b5f918 ffffffffb10bcecd 0000000000000000 ffff880100000001
> [ 2165.954305]  0000000000000001 000000000000000a ffff88016c5a2fd0 ffff88016c5a2700
> [ 2165.955240] Call Trace:
> [ 2165.956170]  [<ffffffffb137f645>] dump_stack+0x68/0x93
> [ 2165.957071]  [<ffffffffb10bcecd>] print_usage_bug+0x1dd/0x1f0
> [ 2165.957979]  [<ffffffffb10bd439>] mark_lock+0x559/0x5c0
> [ 2165.958875]  [<ffffffffb10bc3f0>] ?  print_shortest_lock_dependencies+0x1b0/0x1b0
> [ 2165.959829]  [<ffffffffb10be04d>] __lock_acquire+0x66d/0x12a0
> [ 2165.960729]  [<ffffffffb11ef541>] ? __slab_free+0xa1/0x340
> [ 2165.961625]  [<ffffffffb10dba5d>] ?  debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled+0x1d/0x20
> [ 2165.962530]  [<ffffffffb10bd50f>] ? mark_held_locks+0x6f/0xa0
> [ 2165.963457]  [<ffffffffb10bf0b0>] lock_acquire+0xf0/0x1f0
> [ 2165.964368]  [<ffffffffc0289a1f>] ? i915_gem_shrink+0x29f/0x500 [i915]
> [ 2165.965269]  [<ffffffffc0289a1f>] ? i915_gem_shrink+0x29f/0x500 [i915]
> [ 2165.966150]  [<ffffffffb173d837>] mutex_lock_nested+0x77/0x420
> [ 2165.967030]  [<ffffffffc0289a1f>] ? i915_gem_shrink+0x29f/0x500 [i915]
> [ 2165.967952]  [<ffffffffc027c7a1>] ?  __i915_gem_object_put_pages.part.58+0x161/0x1b0 [i915]
> [ 2165.968835]  [<ffffffffc0289a1f>] i915_gem_shrink+0x29f/0x500 [i915]
> [ 2165.969712]  [<ffffffffc0289e40>] i915_gem_shrinker_scan+0x70/0xb0 [i915]
> [ 2165.970591]  [<ffffffffb119a3ae>] shrink_slab.part.40+0x1fe/0x5d0
> [ 2165.971504]  [<ffffffffb119f19c>] shrink_node+0x22c/0x320
> [ 2165.972371]  [<ffffffffb11a05fb>] kswapd+0x38b/0x9b0
> [ 2165.973238]  [<ffffffffb11a0270>] ?  mem_cgroup_shrink_node+0x330/0x330
> [ 2165.974068]  [<ffffffffb108630f>] kthread+0xff/0x120
> [ 2165.974929]  [<ffffffffb1086210>] ? kthread_park+0x60/0x60
> [ 2165.975847]  [<ffffffffb1742d57>] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
> 
> Reported-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Fixes: 1233e2db199d ("drm/i915: Move object backing storage manipulation...")
> Testcase: igt/gem_ctx_create/maximum-swap
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>

As discussed in IRC, I think we rather should add a lock class to
obj->mm, to avoid chasing these in the future.

Regards, Joonas
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-01  9:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-31 12:40 [PATCH] drm/i915: Mark up obj->mm.lock for shrinker Chris Wilson
2016-10-31 13:01 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-10-31 13:32   ` Chris Wilson
2016-10-31 13:16 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for " Patchwork
2016-11-01  9:10 ` Joonas Lahtinen [this message]
2016-11-01  9:15   ` [PATCH] " Chris Wilson
2016-11-01  9:19     ` Joonas Lahtinen

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=1477991431.3103.5.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    /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.