All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: reinette.chatre@intel.com, alexander.levin@verizon.com,
	fenghua.yu@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	tony.luck@intel.com, vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 11:11:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1513073503133239@kroah.com> (raw)


This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount

to the 4.14-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     x86-intel_rdt-fix-potential-deadlock-during-resctrl-unmount.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.14 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From foo@baz Tue Dec 12 10:32:42 CET 2017
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 02:16:58 -0700
Subject: x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount

From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>


[ Upstream commit 36b6f9fcb8928c06b6638a4cf91bc9d69bb49aa2 ]

Lockdep warns about a potential deadlock:

[   66.782842] ======================================================
[   66.782888] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[   66.782937] 4.14.0-rc2-test-test+ #48 Not tainted
[   66.782983] ------------------------------------------------------
[   66.783052] umount/336 is trying to acquire lock:
[   66.783117]  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffff81032395>] rdt_kill_sb+0x215/0x390
[   66.783193]
               but task is already holding lock:
[   66.783244]  (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810321b6>] rdt_kill_sb+0x36/0x390
[   66.783305]
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[   66.783364]
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[   66.783419]
               -> #3 (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}:
[   66.783467]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.783509]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.783543]        __mutex_lock+0x71/0x9b0
[   66.783575]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[   66.783610]        intel_rdt_online_cpu+0x3b/0x430
[   66.783649]        cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xab/0x8e0
[   66.783687]        cpuhp_thread_fun+0x7a/0x150
[   66.783722]        smpboot_thread_fn+0x1cc/0x270
[   66.783764]        kthread+0x16e/0x190
[   66.783794]        ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
[   66.783825]
               -> #2 (cpuhp_state){+.+.}:
[   66.783870]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.783906]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.783938]        cpuhp_issue_call+0x102/0x170
[   66.783974]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x154/0x2a0
[   66.784023]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xc7/0x170
[   66.784061]        page_writeback_init+0x43/0x67
[   66.784097]        pagecache_init+0x43/0x4a
[   66.784131]        start_kernel+0x3ad/0x3f7
[   66.784165]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[   66.784204]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[   66.784241]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[   66.784270]
               -> #1 (cpuhp_state_mutex){+.+.}:
[   66.784319]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.784355]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.784387]        __mutex_lock+0x71/0x9b0
[   66.784419]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[   66.784454]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x52/0x2a0
[   66.784497]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xc7/0x170
[   66.784535]        page_alloc_init+0x28/0x30
[   66.784569]        start_kernel+0x148/0x3f7
[   66.784602]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[   66.784642]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[   66.784678]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[   66.784707]
               -> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
[   66.784759]        check_prev_add+0x32f/0x6e0
[   66.784794]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.784830]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.784863]        cpus_read_lock+0x3d/0xb0
[   66.784896]        rdt_kill_sb+0x215/0x390
[   66.784930]        deactivate_locked_super+0x3e/0x70
[   66.784968]        deactivate_super+0x40/0x60
[   66.785003]        cleanup_mnt+0x3f/0x80
[   66.785034]        __cleanup_mnt+0x12/0x20
[   66.785070]        task_work_run+0x8b/0xc0
[   66.785103]        exit_to_usermode_loop+0x94/0xa0
[   66.786804]        syscall_return_slowpath+0xe8/0x150
[   66.788502]        entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0xab/0xad
[   66.790194]
               other info that might help us debug this:

[   66.795139] Chain exists of:
                 cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem --> cpuhp_state --> rdtgroup_mutex

[   66.800035]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[   66.803267]        CPU0                    CPU1
[   66.804867]        ----                    ----
[   66.806443]   lock(rdtgroup_mutex);
[   66.808002]                                lock(cpuhp_state);
[   66.809565]                                lock(rdtgroup_mutex);
[   66.811110]   lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
[   66.812608]
                *** DEADLOCK ***

[   66.816983] 2 locks held by umount/336:
[   66.818418]  #0:  (&type->s_umount_key#35){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81229738>] deactivate_super+0x38/0x60
[   66.819922]  #1:  (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810321b6>] rdt_kill_sb+0x36/0x390

When the resctrl filesystem is unmounted the locks should be obtain in the
locks in the same order as was done when the cpus came online:

      cpu_hotplug_lock before rdtgroup_mutex.

This also requires to switch the static_branch_disable() calls to the
_cpulocked variant because now cpu hotplug lock is held already.

[ tglx: Switched to cpus_read_[un]lock ]

Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>
Acked-by: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Acked-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/cc292e76be073f7260604651711c47b09fd0dc81.1508490116.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@verizon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c |   10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c
@@ -1297,9 +1297,7 @@ static void rmdir_all_sub(void)
 		kfree(rdtgrp);
 	}
 	/* Notify online CPUs to update per cpu storage and PQR_ASSOC MSR */
-	get_online_cpus();
 	update_closid_rmid(cpu_online_mask, &rdtgroup_default);
-	put_online_cpus();
 
 	kernfs_remove(kn_info);
 	kernfs_remove(kn_mongrp);
@@ -1310,6 +1308,7 @@ static void rdt_kill_sb(struct super_blo
 {
 	struct rdt_resource *r;
 
+	cpus_read_lock();
 	mutex_lock(&rdtgroup_mutex);
 
 	/*Put everything back to default values. */
@@ -1317,11 +1316,12 @@ static void rdt_kill_sb(struct super_blo
 		reset_all_ctrls(r);
 	cdp_disable();
 	rmdir_all_sub();
-	static_branch_disable(&rdt_alloc_enable_key);
-	static_branch_disable(&rdt_mon_enable_key);
-	static_branch_disable(&rdt_enable_key);
+	static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&rdt_alloc_enable_key);
+	static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&rdt_mon_enable_key);
+	static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&rdt_enable_key);
 	kernfs_kill_sb(sb);
 	mutex_unlock(&rdtgroup_mutex);
+	cpus_read_unlock();
 }
 
 static struct file_system_type rdt_fs_type = {


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from reinette.chatre@intel.com are

queue-4.14/x86-intel_rdt-fix-potential-deadlock-during-resctrl-unmount.patch

             reply	other threads:[~2017-12-12 10:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-12 10:11 gregkh [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-12-15  8:01 Patch "x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh

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=1513073503133239@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=alexander.levin@verizon.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
    --cc=sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com \
    --cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.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.