From: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
To: DaeRyong Jeong <threeearcat@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: "Fix data race in tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag" triggers a lockdep warning
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 11:22:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1572535333.5937.114.camel@lca.pw> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1572471633.5937.112.camel@lca.pw>
On Wed, 2019-10-30 at 17:40 -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> The commit b6da31b2c07c ("tty: Fix data race in
> tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag") creates a locking order,
>
> &(&port->lock)->rlock --> &(&zone->lock)->rlock
>
> which will trigger a lockdep warning below.
>
> [ 489.312784] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 489.319655] 5.4.0-rc5-next-20191030+ #2 Tainted: G W L
> [ 489.326610] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 489.333479] sshd/5541 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 489.338785] ffff008b7cff9290 (&(&zone->lock)->rlock){..-.}, at:
> rmqueue+0xfe8/0x2274
> [ 489.347230]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 489.354444] 1cff0009e39c0540 (&(&port->lock)->rlock){-.-.}, at:
> pty_write+0x60/0xd0
> [ 489.362799]
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> [ 489.373052]
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 489.381916]
> -> #3 (&(&port->lock)->rlock){-.-.}:
> [ 489.389403] lock_acquire+0x320/0x360
> [ 489.394279] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x7c/0x9c
> [ 489.399849] tty_port_tty_get+0x24/0x60
> [ 489.404896] tty_port_default_wakeup+0x1c/0x3c
> [ 489.410551] tty_port_tty_wakeup+0x34/0x40
> [ 489.415859] uart_write_wakeup+0x28/0x44
> [ 489.420993] pl011_tx_chars+0x1b8/0x270
> [ 489.426040] pl011_start_tx+0x24/0x70
> [ 489.430913] __uart_start+0x5c/0x68
> [ 489.435612] uart_write+0x164/0x1c8
> [ 489.440312] do_output_char+0x33c/0x348
> [ 489.445358] n_tty_write+0x4bc/0x60c
> [ 489.450143] tty_write+0x338/0x474
> [ 489.454755] redirected_tty_write+0xc0/0xdc
> [ 489.460150] do_loop_readv_writev+0x140/0x180
> [ 489.465718] do_iter_write+0xe0/0x10c
> [ 489.470590] vfs_writev+0x134/0x1cc
> [ 489.475289] do_writev+0xbc/0x130
> [ 489.479815] __arm64_sys_writev+0x58/0x8c
> [ 489.485038] el0_svc_handler+0x170/0x240
> [ 489.490173] el0_sync_handler+0x150/0x250
> [ 489.495393] el0_sync+0x164/0x180
> [ 489.499915]
> -> #2 (&port_lock_key){-.-.}:
> [ 489.506793] lock_acquire+0x320/0x360
> [ 489.511666] _raw_spin_lock+0x64/0x80
> [ 489.516540] pl011_console_write+0xec/0x2cc
> [ 489.521934] console_unlock+0x794/0x96c
> [ 489.526981] vprintk_emit+0x260/0x31c
> [ 489.531854] vprintk_default+0x54/0x7c
> [ 489.536813] vprintk_func+0x218/0x254
> [ 489.541687] printk+0x7c/0xa4
>
> -> #1 (console_owner){-...}:
> [ 489.703613] lock_acquire+0x320/0x360
> [ 489.708486] console_lock_spinning_enable+0x6c/0x7c
> [ 489.714575] console_unlock+0x4f8/0x96c
> [ 489.719622] vprintk_emit+0x260/0x31c
> [ 489.724495] vprintk_default+0x54/0x7c
> [ 489.729454] vprintk_func+0x218/0x254
> [ 489.734327] printk+0x7c/0xa4
> [ 489.810371]
Correction -- the call traces of the locking order from,
&(&zone->lock)->rlock --> console_owner:
-> #1 (console_owner){-...}:
[ 489.703613] lock_acquire+0x320/0x360
[ 489.708486] console_lock_spinning_enable+0x6c/0x7c
[ 489.714575] console_unlock+0x4f8/0x96c
[ 489.719622] vprintk_emit+0x260/0x31c
[ 489.724495] vprintk_default+0x54/0x7c
[ 489.729454] vprintk_func+0x218/0x254
[ 489.734327] printk+0x7c/0xa4
[ 489.738506] get_random_u64+0x1c4/0x1dc
[ 489.743552] add_to_free_area_random+0x50/0x16c
[ 489.749292] __free_one_page+0x374/0x6a0
[ 489.754425] free_one_page+0x6c/0x11c
[ 489.810371]
Should b6da31b2c07c ("tty: Fix data race in tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag")
be reverted first while taking time to rework?
> -> #0 (&(&zone->lock)->rlock){..-.}:
> [ 489.817854] validate_chain+0xf6c/0x2e2c
> [ 489.822988] __lock_acquire+0x868/0xc2c
> [ 489.828035] lock_acquire+0x320/0x360
> [ 489.832909] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x7c/0x9c
> [ 489.838475] rmqueue+0xfe8/0x2274
> [ 489.843002] get_page_from_freelist+0x474/0x688
> [ 489.848743] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x3b8/0x1928
> [ 489.854573] alloc_pages_current+0xd0/0xe0
> [ 489.859882] stack_depot_save+0x300/0x440
> [ 489.865103] __kasan_kmalloc+0x198/0x1e0
> [ 489.870236] kasan_slab_alloc+0x18/0x20
> [ 489.875284] slab_post_alloc_hook+0x48/0x9c
> [ 489.880677] kmem_cache_alloc+0x2e8/0x588
> [ 489.885898] create_object+0x60/0x698
> [ 489.890771] kmemleak_alloc+0x78/0xb8
> [ 489.895644] slab_post_alloc_hook+0x64/0x9c
> [ 489.901038] __kmalloc+0x328/0x490
> [ 489.905652] __tty_buffer_request_room+0x118/0x1f8
> [ 489.911654] tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag+0x6c/0x144
> [ 489.918263] pty_write+0x80/0xd0
> [ 489.922701] n_tty_write+0x450/0x60c
> [ 489.927486] tty_write+0x338/0x474
> [ 489.932098] __vfs_write+0x88/0x214
> [ 489.936796] vfs_write+0x12c/0x1a4
> [ 489.941411] ksys_write+0xb0/0x120
> [ 489.946027] __arm64_sys_write+0x54/0x88
> [ 489.951161] el0_svc_handler+0x170/0x240
> [ 489.956294] el0_sync_handler+0x150/0x250
> [ 489.961514] el0_sync+0x164/0x180
> [ 489.966038]
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> [ 489.976117] Chain exists of:
> &(&zone->lock)->rlock --> &port_lock_key --> &(&port->lock)-
> > rlock
>
> [ 489.989937] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 489.997239] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 490.002456] ---- ----
> [ 490.007673] lock(&(&port->lock)->rlock);
> [ 490.012459] lock(&port_lock_key);
> [ 490.019155] lock(&(&port->lock)->rlock);
> [ 490.026458] lock(&(&zone->lock)->rlock);
> [ 490.031244]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 490.039241] 5 locks held by sshd/5541:
> [ 490.043677] #0: 12ff0009eb0c6890 (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at:
> ldsem_down_read+0x3c/0x48
> [ 490.052465] #1: 12ff0009eb0c6918 (&tty->atomic_write_lock){+.+.}, at:
> tty_write+0x12c/0x474
> [ 490.061599] #2: 12ff0009eb0c6aa0 (&o_tty->termios_rwsem/1){++++}, at:
> n_tty_write+0x10c/0x60c
> [ 490.070908] #3: ffff90001f852360 (&ldata->output_lock){+.+.}, at:
> n_tty_write+0x278/0x60c
> [ 490.079868] #4: 1cff0009e39c0540 (&(&port->lock)->rlock){-.-.}, at:
> pty_write+0x60/0xd0
> [ 490.088654]
> stack backtrace:
> [ 490.094398] CPU: 31 PID: 5541 Comm: sshd Tainted: G W L 5.4.0-
> rc5-next-20191030+ #2
> [ 490.103871] Hardware name: HPE Apollo 70 /C01_APACHE_MB ,
> BIOS L50_5.13_1.11 06/18/2019
> [ 490.114300] Call trace:
> [ 490.117438] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x248
> [ 490.121791] show_stack+0x20/0x2c
> [ 490.125798] dump_stack+0xc8/0x130
> [ 490.129890] print_circular_bug+0x368/0x380
> [ 490.134764] check_noncircular+0x28c/0x294
> [ 490.139550] validate_chain+0xf6c/0x2e2c
> [ 490.144164] __lock_acquire+0x868/0xc2c
> [ 490.148691] lock_acquire+0x320/0x360
> [ 490.153044] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x7c/0x9c
> [ 490.158090] rmqueue+0xfe8/0x2274
> [ 490.162097] get_page_from_freelist+0x474/0x688
> [ 490.167317] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x3b8/0x1928
> [ 490.172625] alloc_pages_current+0xd0/0xe0
> [ 490.177412] stack_depot_save+0x300/0x440
> [ 490.182112] __kasan_kmalloc+0x198/0x1e0
> [ 490.186723] kasan_slab_alloc+0x18/0x20
> [ 490.191249] slab_post_alloc_hook+0x48/0x9c
> [ 490.196121] kmem_cache_alloc+0x2e8/0x588
> [ 490.200820] create_object+0x60/0x698
> [ 490.205173] kmemleak_alloc+0x78/0xb8
> [ 490.209525] slab_post_alloc_hook+0x64/0x9c
> [ 490.214398] __kmalloc+0x328/0x490
> [ 490.218491] __tty_buffer_request_room+0x118/0x1f8
> [ 490.223972] tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag+0x6c/0x144
> [ 490.230059] pty_write+0x80/0xd0
> [ 490.233977] n_tty_write+0x450/0x60c
> [ 490.238241] tty_write+0x338/0x474
> [ 490.242333] __vfs_write+0x88/0x214
> [ 490.246511] vfs_write+0x12c/0x1a4
> [ 490.250601] ksys_write+0xb0/0x120
> [ 490.254693] __arm64_sys_write+0x54/0x88
> [ 490.259305] el0_svc_handler+0x170/0x240
> [ 490.263918] el0_sync_handler+0x150/0x250
> [ 490.268617] el0_sync+0x164/0x180
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-31 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-30 21:40 "Fix data race in tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag" triggers a lockdep warning Qian Cai
2019-10-31 15:22 ` Qian Cai [this message]
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=1572535333.5937.114.camel@lca.pw \
--to=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jslaby@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=threeearcat@gmail.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.