All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/mq: Cure cpu hotplug lock inversion
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 08:27:01 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170504142700.GD9292@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170504141849.caxfp4b4k3qnrvr4@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Thu, May 04 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:56:57AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 05/04/2017 07:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > 
> > > By poking at /debug/sched_features I triggered the following splat:
> > > 
> > >  [] ======================================================
> > >  [] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > >  [] 4.11.0-00873-g964c8b7-dirty #694 Not tainted
> > >  [] ------------------------------------------------------
> > >  [] bash/2109 is trying to acquire lock:
> > >  []  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff8120cb8b>] static_key_slow_dec+0x1b/0x50
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] but task is already holding lock:
> > >  []  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4){+++++.}, at: [<ffffffff81140216>] sched_feat_write+0x86/0x170
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] -> #2 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4){+++++.}:
> > >  []        lock_acquire+0x100/0x210
> > >  []        down_write+0x28/0x60
> > >  []        start_creating+0x5e/0xf0
> > >  []        debugfs_create_dir+0x13/0x110
> > >  []        blk_mq_debugfs_register+0x21/0x70
> > >  []        blk_mq_register_dev+0x64/0xd0
> > >  []        blk_register_queue+0x6a/0x170
> > >  []        device_add_disk+0x22d/0x440
> > >  []        loop_add+0x1f3/0x280
> > >  []        loop_init+0x104/0x142
> > >  []        do_one_initcall+0x43/0x180
> > >  []        kernel_init_freeable+0x1de/0x266
> > >  []        kernel_init+0xe/0x100
> > >  []        ret_from_fork+0x31/0x40
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] -> #1 (all_q_mutex){+.+.+.}:
> > >  []        lock_acquire+0x100/0x210
> > >  []        __mutex_lock+0x6c/0x960
> > >  []        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
> > >  []        blk_mq_init_allocated_queue+0x37c/0x4e0
> > >  []        blk_mq_init_queue+0x3a/0x60
> > >  []        loop_add+0xe5/0x280
> > >  []        loop_init+0x104/0x142
> > >  []        do_one_initcall+0x43/0x180
> > >  []        kernel_init_freeable+0x1de/0x266
> > >  []        kernel_init+0xe/0x100
> > >  []        ret_from_fork+0x31/0x40
> > > 
> > >  []  *** DEADLOCK ***
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] 3 locks held by bash/2109:
> > >  []  #0:  (sb_writers#11){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff81292bcd>] vfs_write+0x17d/0x1a0
> > >  []  #1:  (debugfs_srcu){......}, at: [<ffffffff8155a90d>] full_proxy_write+0x5d/0xd0
> > >  []  #2:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4){+++++.}, at: [<ffffffff81140216>] sched_feat_write+0x86/0x170
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] stack backtrace:
> > >  [] CPU: 9 PID: 2109 Comm: bash Not tainted 4.11.0-00873-g964c8b7-dirty #694
> > >  [] Hardware name: Intel Corporation S2600GZ/S2600GZ, BIOS SE5C600.86B.02.02.0002.122320131210 12/23/2013
> > >  [] Call Trace:
> > > 
> > >  []  lock_acquire+0x100/0x210
> > >  []  get_online_cpus+0x2a/0x90
> > >  []  static_key_slow_dec+0x1b/0x50
> > >  []  static_key_disable+0x20/0x30
> > >  []  sched_feat_write+0x131/0x170
> > >  []  full_proxy_write+0x97/0xd0
> > >  []  __vfs_write+0x28/0x120
> > >  []  vfs_write+0xb5/0x1a0
> > >  []  SyS_write+0x49/0xa0
> > >  []  entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x23/0xc2
> > > 
> > > This is because of the cpu hotplug lock rework. Break the chain at #1
> > > by reversing the lock acquisition order. This way i_mutex_key#4 no
> > > longer depends on cpu_hotplug_lock and things are good.
> > 
> > Thanks Peter, applied.
> 
> Note that the hotplug rework is still work-in-progress and lives in a
> -tip branch.
> 
> That said, the patch is harmless outside of that, so yes it can travel
> upstream independently. But note that mainline cannot yet trigger that
> splat.

Yes, may as well just get it in and avoid any dependencies.

-- 
Jens Axboe

      reply	other threads:[~2017-05-04 14:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-04 13:05 [PATCH] block/mq: Cure cpu hotplug lock inversion Peter Zijlstra
2017-05-04 13:56 ` Jens Axboe
2017-05-04 14:18   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-05-04 14:27     ` Jens Axboe [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=20170504142700.GD9292@kernel.dk \
    --to=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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.