Re: [PATCH v3 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

[Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>]

On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:53:41AM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:36:38AM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 06:56:39PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > > I didn't want to bother you so I was planning to send the next spin
> > > after making more progress. However, PATCH v2 reports too many false
> > > positives because Dept tracked the bit_wait_table[] wrong way - I
> > > apologize for that. So I decided to send PATCH v3 first before going
> > > further for those who want to run Dept for now.
> > > 
> > > There might still be some false positives but not overwhelming.
> > >
> > 
> > Hello Byungchul, I'm running DEPT v3 on my system
> > and I see report below.
> > 
> > Looking at the kmemleak code and comment, I think
> > kmemleak tried to avoid lockdep recursive warning
> > but detected by DEPT?
> >
> 
> Forgot to include another warning caused by DEPT.
> 
> And comment below might be useful for debugging:
> 
> in kmemleak.c:
>   43  * Locks and mutexes are acquired/nested in the following order:
>   44  *
>   45  *   scan_mutex [-> object->lock] -> kmemleak_lock -> other_object->lock (SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING)
>   46  *
>   47  * No kmemleak_lock and object->lock nesting is allowed outside scan_mutex
>   48  * regions.
> 
> ===================================================
> DEPT: Circular dependency has been detected.
> 5.17.0-rc1+ #1 Tainted: G        W        
> ---------------------------------------------------
> summary
> ---------------------------------------------------
> *** DEADLOCK ***
> 
> context A
>     [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock:0)
>     [W] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(kmemleak_lock:0)
>     [E] spin_unlock(&object->lock:0)
> 
> context B
>     [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(kmemleak_lock:0)
>     [W] _raw_spin_lock_nested(&object->lock:0)
>     [E] spin_unlock(kmemleak_lock:0)
> 
> [S]: start of the event context
> [W]: the wait blocked
> [E]: the event not reachable

Hi Hyeonggon,

Dept also allows the following scenario when an user guarantees that
each lock instance is different from another at a different depth:

   lock A0 with depth
   lock A1 with depth + 1
   lock A2 with depth + 2
   lock A3 with depth + 3
   (and so on)
   ..
   unlock A3
   unlock A2
   unlock A1
   unlock A0

However, Dept does not allow the following scenario where another lock
class cuts in the dependency chain:

   lock A0 with depth
   lock B
   lock A1 with depth + 1
   lock A2 with depth + 2
   lock A3 with depth + 3
   (and so on)
   ..
   unlock A3
   unlock A2
   unlock A1
   unlock B
   unlock A0

This scenario is clearly problematic. What do you think is going to
happen with another context running the following?

   lock A1 with depth
   lock B
   lock A2 with depth + 1
   lock A3 with depth + 2
   (and so on)
   ..
   unlock A3
   unlock A2
   unlock B
   unlock A1

It's a deadlock. That's why Dept reports this case as a problem. Or am I
missing something?

Thanks,
Byungchul

> ---------------------------------------------------
> context A's detail
> ---------------------------------------------------
> context A
>     [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock:0)
>     [W] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(kmemleak_lock:0)
>     [E] spin_unlock(&object->lock:0)
> 
> [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock:0):
> [<ffffffc00810302c>] scan_gray_list+0x84/0x13c
> stacktrace:
>       dept_ecxt_enter+0x88/0xf4
>       _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xf0/0x1c4
>       scan_gray_list+0x84/0x13c
>       kmemleak_scan+0x2d8/0x54c
>       kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
>       kthread+0xd4/0xe4
>       ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> 
> [W] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(kmemleak_lock:0):
> [<ffffffc008102ebc>] scan_block+0x3c/0x128
> stacktrace:
>       __dept_wait+0x8c/0xa4
>       dept_wait+0x6c/0x88
>       _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xb8/0x1c4
>       scan_block+0x3c/0x128
>       scan_gray_list+0xc4/0x13c
>       kmemleak_scan+0x2d8/0x54c
>       kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
>       kthread+0xd4/0xe4
>       ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> 
> [E] spin_unlock(&object->lock:0):
> [<ffffffc008102ee0>] scan_block+0x60/0x128
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------
> context B's detail
> ---------------------------------------------------
> context B
>     [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(kmemleak_lock:0)
>     [W] _raw_spin_lock_nested(&object->lock:0)
>     [E] spin_unlock(kmemleak_lock:0)
> 
> [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(kmemleak_lock:0):
> [<ffffffc008102ebc>] scan_block+0x3c/0x128
> stacktrace:
>       dept_ecxt_enter+0x88/0xf4
>       _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xf0/0x1c4
>       scan_block+0x3c/0x128
>       kmemleak_scan+0x19c/0x54c
>       kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
>       kthread+0xd4/0xe4
>       ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> 
> [W] _raw_spin_lock_nested(&object->lock:0):
> [<ffffffc008102f34>] scan_block+0xb4/0x128
> stacktrace:
>       dept_wait+0x74/0x88
>       _raw_spin_lock_nested+0xa8/0x1b0
>       scan_block+0xb4/0x128
>       kmemleak_scan+0x19c/0x54c
>       kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
>       kthread+0xd4/0xe4
>       ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> [E] spin_unlock(kmemleak_lock:0):
> [<ffffffc008102ee0>] scan_block+0x60/0x128
> stacktrace:
>       dept_event+0x7c/0xfc
>       _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x8c/0x120
>       scan_block+0x60/0x128
>       kmemleak_scan+0x19c/0x54c
>       kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
>       kthread+0xd4/0xe4
>       ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> ---------------------------------------------------
> information that might be helpful
> ---------------------------------------------------
> CPU: 1 PID: 38 Comm: kmemleak Tainted: G        W         5.17.0-rc1+ #1
> Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
> Call trace:
>  dump_backtrace.part.0+0x9c/0xc4
>  show_stack+0x14/0x28
>  dump_stack_lvl+0x9c/0xcc
>  dump_stack+0x14/0x2c
>  print_circle+0x2d4/0x438
>  cb_check_dl+0x6c/0x70
>  bfs+0xc0/0x168
>  add_dep+0x88/0x11c
>  add_wait+0x2d0/0x2dc
>  __dept_wait+0x8c/0xa4
>  dept_wait+0x6c/0x88
>  _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xb8/0x1c4
>  scan_block+0x3c/0x128
>  scan_gray_list+0xc4/0x13c
>  kmemleak_scan+0x2d8/0x54c
>  kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
>  kthread+0xd4/0xe4
>  ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> 
> > ===================================================
> > DEPT: Circular dependency has been detected.
> > 5.17.0-rc1+ #1 Tainted: G        W
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > summary
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > *** AA DEADLOCK ***
> > 
> > context A
> >     [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock:0)
> >     [W] _raw_spin_lock_nested(&object->lock:0)
> >     [E] spin_unlock(&object->lock:0)
> > 
> > [S]: start of the event context
> > [W]: the wait blocked
> > [E]: the event not reachable
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > context A's detail
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > context A
> >     [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock:0)
> >     [W] _raw_spin_lock_nested(&object->lock:0)
> >     [E] spin_unlock(&object->lock:0)
> > 
> > [S] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock:0):
> > [<ffffffc00810302c>] scan_gray_list+0x84/0x13c
> > stacktrace:
> >       dept_ecxt_enter+0x88/0xf4
> >       _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xf0/0x1c4
> >       scan_gray_list+0x84/0x13c
> >       kmemleak_scan+0x2d8/0x54c
> >       kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
> >       kthread+0xd4/0xe4
> >       ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> > 
> > [E] spin_unlock(&object->lock:0):
> > [<ffffffc008102ee0>] scan_block+0x60/0x128
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > information that might be helpful
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > CPU: 1 PID: 38 Comm: kmemleak Tainted: G        W         5.17.0-rc1+ #1
> > Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
> > Call trace:
> >  dump_backtrace.part.0+0x9c/0xc4
> >  show_stack+0x14/0x28
> >  dump_stack_lvl+0x9c/0xcc
> >  dump_stack+0x14/0x2c
> >  print_circle+0x2d4/0x438
> >  cb_check_dl+0x44/0x70
> >  bfs+0x60/0x168
> >  add_dep+0x88/0x11c
> >  add_wait+0x2d0/0x2dc
> >  __dept_wait+0x8c/0xa4
> >  dept_wait+0x6c/0x88
> >  _raw_spin_lock_nested+0xa8/0x1b0
> >  scan_block+0xb4/0x128
> >  scan_gray_list+0xc4/0x13c
> >  kmemleak_scan+0x2d8/0x54c
> >  kmemleak_scan_thread+0xac/0xd4
> >  kthread+0xd4/0xe4
> >  ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> >
> [...]
> 
> --
> Thank you, You are awesome!
> Hyeonggon :-)