From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: fweisbec@gmail.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@elte.hu,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Weird rcu lockdep warning
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 01:49:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100414014930.GI2538@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100413.171306.25868761.davem@davemloft.net>
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 05:13:06PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 02:02:27 +0200
>
> > I just have a guess though....
> > This seems to always happen from NMI path, and lockdep is disabled on NMI.
> > I suspect the lock_acquire() performed by rcu_read_lock() is just ignored
> > and then the rcu_read_lock_held() check has the wrong result...
>
> Yeah, I bet that's it too.
>
> lock_is_held() can't return anything meaningful while lockdep is
> disabled, which it is during NMIs.
Ah! So I just need to add a "current->lockdep_recursion"
check to debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(). And move the function to
kernel/rcutree_plugin.h to avoid #include hell.
See below for (untested) patch.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
include/linux/rcupdate.h | 5 +----
kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 11 +++++++++++
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
commit 304d8da6cd791a81ce3164f867e1b3ef4f9af1d1
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue Apr 13 18:45:51 2010 -0700
rcu: Make RCU lockdep check the lockdep_recursion variable
The lockdep facility temporarily disables lockdep checking by incrementing
the current->lockdep_recursion variable. Such disabling happens in NMIs
and in other situations where lockdep might expect to recurse on itself.
This patch therefore checks current->lockdep_recursion, disabling RCU
lockdep splats when this variable is non-zero.
Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Reported-by: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 9f1ddfe..07db2fe 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -101,10 +101,7 @@ extern struct lockdep_map rcu_sched_lock_map;
# define rcu_read_release_sched() \
lock_release(&rcu_sched_lock_map, 1, _THIS_IP_)
-static inline int debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(void)
-{
- return likely(rcu_scheduler_active && debug_locks);
-}
+extern int debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(void);
/**
* rcu_read_lock_held - might we be in RCU read-side critical section?
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
index 79b53bd..2169abe 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
@@ -1067,3 +1067,14 @@ static void rcu_needs_cpu_flush(void)
}
#endif /* #else #if !defined(CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ) */
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
+
+int debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(void)
+{
+ return likely(rcu_scheduler_active &&
+ debug_locks &&
+ current->lockdep_recursion = 0);
+}
+
+#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC */
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: fweisbec@gmail.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@elte.hu,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Weird rcu lockdep warning
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:49:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100414014930.GI2538@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100413.171306.25868761.davem@davemloft.net>
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 05:13:06PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 02:02:27 +0200
>
> > I just have a guess though....
> > This seems to always happen from NMI path, and lockdep is disabled on NMI.
> > I suspect the lock_acquire() performed by rcu_read_lock() is just ignored
> > and then the rcu_read_lock_held() check has the wrong result...
>
> Yeah, I bet that's it too.
>
> lock_is_held() can't return anything meaningful while lockdep is
> disabled, which it is during NMIs.
Ah! So I just need to add a "current->lockdep_recursion"
check to debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(). And move the function to
kernel/rcutree_plugin.h to avoid #include hell.
See below for (untested) patch.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
include/linux/rcupdate.h | 5 +----
kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 11 +++++++++++
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
commit 304d8da6cd791a81ce3164f867e1b3ef4f9af1d1
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue Apr 13 18:45:51 2010 -0700
rcu: Make RCU lockdep check the lockdep_recursion variable
The lockdep facility temporarily disables lockdep checking by incrementing
the current->lockdep_recursion variable. Such disabling happens in NMIs
and in other situations where lockdep might expect to recurse on itself.
This patch therefore checks current->lockdep_recursion, disabling RCU
lockdep splats when this variable is non-zero.
Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Reported-by: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 9f1ddfe..07db2fe 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -101,10 +101,7 @@ extern struct lockdep_map rcu_sched_lock_map;
# define rcu_read_release_sched() \
lock_release(&rcu_sched_lock_map, 1, _THIS_IP_)
-static inline int debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(void)
-{
- return likely(rcu_scheduler_active && debug_locks);
-}
+extern int debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(void);
/**
* rcu_read_lock_held - might we be in RCU read-side critical section?
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
index 79b53bd..2169abe 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
@@ -1067,3 +1067,14 @@ static void rcu_needs_cpu_flush(void)
}
#endif /* #else #if !defined(CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ) */
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
+
+int debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled(void)
+{
+ return likely(rcu_scheduler_active &&
+ debug_locks &&
+ current->lockdep_recursion == 0);
+}
+
+#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-14 1:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-13 20:04 Weird rcu lockdep warning Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-13 20:04 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-13 23:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-13 23:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 0:02 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-14 0:02 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-14 0:13 ` David Miller
2010-04-14 0:13 ` David Miller
2010-04-14 1:49 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-04-14 1:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 1:51 ` David Miller
2010-04-14 1:51 ` David Miller
2010-04-14 3:34 ` Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-14 3:34 ` Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-14 15:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 15:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 15:51 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-14 15:51 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-14 16:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 16:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-15 4:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-15 4:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-15 18:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-15 18:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-15 19:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-15 19:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20100414014930.GI2538@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.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.