All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>,
	josh@joshtriplett.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
	jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	sramana@codeaurora.org, prsood@codeaurora.org,
	pkondeti@codeaurora.org, markivx@codeaurora.org,
	peterz@infradead.org, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: Query regarding synchronize_sched_expedited and resched_cpu
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 21:04:56 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170919040456.GC3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170919024822.GG5994@X58A-UD3R>

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:48:22AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 07:33:29PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Hello Paul and Steven,
> > > > 
> > > > This is saying:
> > > > 
> > > > Thread A
> > > > --------
> > > > takedown_cpu()
> > > >    irq_lock_sparse()
> > > >    wait_for_completion(&st->done) // Wait for completion of B
> > > >    irq_unlock_sparse()
> > > > 
> > > > Thread B
> > > > --------
> > > > cpuhp_invoke_callback()
> > > >    irq_lock_sparse() // Wait for A to irq_unlock_sparse()
> > > >    (on the way going to complete(&st->done))
> > > > 
> > > > So, lockdep consider this as a deadlock.
> > > > Is it possible to happen?
> > > 
> > > In addition, if it's impossible, then we should fix lock class
> > > assignments so that the locks actually have different classes.
> > 
> > Interesting, and thank you for the analysis!
> > 
> > The strange thing is that the way you describe it, this would be a
> > deterministic deadlock.  Yet CPU hotplug operations complete just fine
> > in my tests.  What am I missing here?
> 
> Hi, :)
> 
> Lockdep basically reports either (1) an actual deadlock happened at the
> time or (2) a deadlock possibility, even w/o LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE.
> 
> Both are useful. But LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE can only do the latter. IOW,
> the deadlock would actually happen _only_ when the two threads(A and B)
> run simultaniously.
> 
> In your case, those two threads might run at different timings. So it's
> not an actual deadlock, but still has a possibility for the problem to
> happen later.

Fair enough, if the wakeup always happened first, deadlock might well
be avoided.  If the sleep happened first, I suspect deadlock would
be deterministic in this case.

							Thanx, Paul

> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Byungchul
> > > > 
> > > > > [   35.313943] 
> > > > > [   35.313943] 3 locks held by torture_onoff/766:
> > > > > [   35.313943]  #0:  (cpu_add_remove_lock){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffb9060be2>] do_cpu_down+0x22/0x50
> > > > > [   35.313943]  #1:  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffffb90acc41>] percpu_down_write+0x21/0xf0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  #2:  (sparse_irq_lock){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffb90c5e42>] irq_lock_sparse+0x12/0x20
> > > > > [   35.313943] 
> > > > > [   35.313943] stack backtrace:
> > > > > [   35.313943] CPU: 7 PID: 766 Comm: torture_onoff Not tainted 4.13.0-rc4+ #1
> > > > > [   35.313943] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Ubuntu-1.8.2-1ubuntu1 04/01/2014
> > > > > [   35.313943] Call Trace:
> > > > > [   35.313943]  dump_stack+0x67/0x97
> > > > > [   35.313943]  print_circular_bug+0x21d/0x330
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? add_lock_to_list.isra.31+0xc0/0xc0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  check_prev_add+0x401/0x800
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? wake_up_q+0x70/0x70
> > > > > [   35.313943]  __lock_acquire+0x1100/0x11a0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? __lock_acquire+0x1100/0x11a0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? add_lock_to_list.isra.31+0xc0/0xc0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  lock_acquire+0x9e/0x1e0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? takedown_cpu+0x86/0xf0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  wait_for_completion+0x36/0x130
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? takedown_cpu+0x86/0xf0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? stop_machine_cpuslocked+0xb9/0xd0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x8b0/0x8b0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? cpuhp_complete_idle_dead+0x10/0x10
> > > > > [   35.313943]  takedown_cpu+0x86/0xf0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xa7/0x8b0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  cpuhp_down_callbacks+0x3d/0x80
> > > > > [   35.313943]  _cpu_down+0xbb/0xf0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  do_cpu_down+0x39/0x50
> > > > > [   35.313943]  cpu_down+0xb/0x10
> > > > > [   35.313943]  torture_offline+0x75/0x140
> > > > > [   35.313943]  torture_onoff+0x102/0x1e0
> > > > > [   35.313943]  kthread+0x142/0x180
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? torture_kthread_stopping+0x70/0x70
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ? kthread_create_on_node+0x40/0x40
> > > > > [   35.313943]  ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
> > > 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2017-09-19  4:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-15 11:14 Query regarding synchronize_sched_expedited and resched_cpu Neeraj Upadhyay
2017-09-17  1:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-17  6:07   ` Neeraj Upadhyay
2017-09-18 15:11     ` Steven Rostedt
2017-09-18 16:01       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-18 16:12         ` Steven Rostedt
2017-09-18 16:24           ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-18 16:29             ` Steven Rostedt
2017-09-18 16:55               ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-18 23:53                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-19  1:23                   ` Steven Rostedt
2017-09-19  2:26                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-19  1:50                   ` Byungchul Park
2017-09-19  2:06                     ` Byungchul Park
2017-09-19  2:33                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-19  2:48                         ` Byungchul Park
2017-09-19  4:04                           ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2017-09-19  5:37                             ` Boqun Feng
2017-09-19  6:11                               ` Mike Galbraith
2017-09-19  6:53                                 ` Byungchul Park
2017-09-19 13:40                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-21 13:57                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-21 15:33                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-19  1:55               ` Byungchul Park
2017-09-19 15:31             ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-19 15:58               ` Steven Rostedt
2017-09-19 16:12                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-21 13:59               ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-21 16:00                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-21 16:30                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-21 16:47                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-21 13:55       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-21 15:31         ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-09-21 16:18           ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-21 15:46         ` Steven Rostedt

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=20170919040456.GC3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markivx@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=neeraju@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=prsood@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sramana@codeaurora.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.