From: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: <oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev>, <lkp@intel.com>,
<linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Subject: [peterz-queue:perf/pmu-unregister] [perf] 24b8359383: WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 16:37:22 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202410251647.21bf487b-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
Hello,
kernel test robot noticed "WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected" on:
commit: 24b8359383aee40fcd58b700a9269e61afa864aa ("perf: Serialize perf_mmap() vs other entry points")
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git perf/pmu-unregister
in testcase: trinity
version: trinity-i386-abe9de86-1_20230429
with following parameters:
runtime: 600s
config: i386-randconfig-015-20241023
compiler: clang-18
test machine: qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu SandyBridge -smp 2 -m 16G
(please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace)
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+
| | de20037e1b | 24b8359383 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+
| WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected | 0 | 16 |
| WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected_trinity-c1_is_trying_to_acquire_lock:at:__might_fault_but_task_is_already_holding_lock:at:perf_event_ctx_lock_nested | 0 | 1 |
| WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected_trinity-c1_is_trying_to_acquire_lock:at:perf_event_ctx_lock_nested_but_task_is_already_holding_lock:at:vm_mmap_pgoff | 0 | 6 |
| WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected_trinity-c3_is_trying_to_acquire_lock:at:perf_event_ctx_lock_nested_but_task_is_already_holding_lock:at:vm_mmap_pgoff | 0 | 4 |
| WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected_trinity-c2_is_trying_to_acquire_lock:at:perf_event_ctx_lock_nested_but_task_is_already_holding_lock:at:vm_mmap_pgoff | 0 | 3 |
| WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected_trinity-c0_is_trying_to_acquire_lock:at:perf_event_ctx_lock_nested_but_task_is_already_holding_lock:at:vm_mmap_pgoff | 0 | 1 |
| WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected_trinity-c0_is_trying_to_acquire_lock:at:__might_fault_but_task_is_already_holding_lock:at:perf_event_ctx_lock_nested | 0 | 1 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202410251647.21bf487b-lkp@intel.com
[ 90.688729][ T589] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 90.689307][ T589] 6.12.0-rc2-00016-g24b8359383ae #1 Tainted: G T
[ 90.689852][ T589] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 90.690348][ T589] trinity-c2/589 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 90.690768][ T589] ee61f668 (&ctx->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: perf_event_ctx_lock_nested (kernel/events/core.c:1318)
[ 90.691425][ T589]
[ 90.691425][ T589] but task is already holding lock:
[ 90.691944][ T589] ed2041d4 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: vm_mmap_pgoff (arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h:41 include/linux/jump_label.h:207 include/linux/mmap_lock.h:35 include/linux/mmap_lock.h:123 mm/util.c:586)
[ 90.692525][ T589]
[ 90.692525][ T589] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[ 90.692525][ T589]
[ 90.693271][ T589]
[ 90.693271][ T589] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 90.693907][ T589]
[ 90.693907][ T589] -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}:
[ 90.694445][ T589] __might_fault (mm/memory.c:6700)
[ 90.694797][ T589] _copy_to_user (include/linux/uaccess.h:184 lib/usercopy.c:26)
[ 90.695152][ T589] perf_read (kernel/events/core.c:5773)
[ 90.695516][ T589] vfs_read (fs/read_write.c:567)
[ 90.695858][ T589] ksys_read (fs/read_write.c:712)
[ 90.696201][ T589] __ia32_sys_read (fs/read_write.c:720)
[ 90.696593][ T589] ia32_sys_call (kbuild/obj/consumer/i386-randconfig-015-20241023/./arch/x86/include/generated/asm/syscalls_32.h:?)
[ 90.696969][ T589] do_int80_syscall_32 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:?)
[ 90.697371][ T589] restore_all_switch_stack (arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S:944)
[ 90.697787][ T589]
[ 90.697787][ T589] -> #0 (&ctx->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
[ 90.698312][ T589] __lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:?)
[ 90.698693][ T589] lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825)
[ 90.699044][ T589] __mutex_lock_common (kernel/locking/mutex.c:608)
[ 90.699444][ T589] mutex_lock_nested (kernel/locking/mutex.c:752 kernel/locking/mutex.c:804)
[ 90.699821][ T589] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested (kernel/events/core.c:1318)
[ 90.700261][ T589] perf_mmap (kernel/events/core.c:? kernel/events/core.c:6812)
[ 90.700597][ T589] mmap_region (mm/mmap.c:1441)
[ 90.700965][ T589] do_mmap (mm/mmap.c:496)
[ 90.701296][ T589] vm_mmap_pgoff (mm/util.c:588)
[ 90.701652][ T589] ksys_mmap_pgoff (mm/mmap.c:542)
[ 90.702033][ T589] __ia32_sys_mmap_pgoff (mm/mmap.c:553 mm/mmap.c:549 mm/mmap.c:549)
[ 90.702432][ T589] ia32_sys_call (kbuild/obj/consumer/i386-randconfig-015-20241023/./arch/x86/include/generated/asm/syscalls_32.h:?)
[ 90.702802][ T589] do_int80_syscall_32 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:?)
[ 90.703196][ T589] restore_all_switch_stack (arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S:944)
[ 90.703638][ T589]
[ 90.703638][ T589] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 90.703638][ T589]
[ 90.704379][ T589] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 90.704379][ T589]
[ 90.704933][ T589] CPU0 CPU1
[ 90.705325][ T589] ---- ----
[ 90.705716][ T589] lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
[ 90.706051][ T589] lock(&ctx->mutex);
[ 90.706514][ T589] lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
[ 90.706994][ T589] lock(&ctx->mutex);
[ 90.707283][ T589]
[ 90.707283][ T589] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 90.707283][ T589]
[ 90.707850][ T589] 1 lock held by trinity-c2/589:
[ 90.708198][ T589] #0: ed2041d4 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: vm_mmap_pgoff (arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h:41 include/linux/jump_label.h:207 include/linux/mmap_lock.h:35 include/linux/mmap_lock.h:123 mm/util.c:586)
[ 90.708811][ T589]
[ 90.708811][ T589] stack backtrace:
[ 90.709244][ T589] CPU: 0 UID: 65534 PID: 589 Comm: trinity-c2 Tainted: G T 6.12.0-rc2-00016-g24b8359383ae #1 8345be9a99138da25a7e4490e34d40eb8aa23b00
[ 90.710301][ T589] Tainted: [T]=RANDSTRUCT
[ 90.710606][ T589] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.2-debian-1.16.2-1 04/01/2014
[ 90.711338][ T589] Call Trace:
[ 90.711577][ T589] dump_stack_lvl (lib/dump_stack.c:122)
[ 90.711906][ T589] dump_stack (lib/dump_stack.c:129)
[ 90.712197][ T589] print_circular_bug (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2076)
[ 90.712561][ T589] check_noncircular (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2206)
[ 90.712930][ T589] __lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:?)
[ 90.713277][ T589] ? __lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4646)
[ 90.713632][ T589] ? kvm_sched_clock_read (arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c:91)
[ 90.713997][ T589] ? sched_clock_noinstr (arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c:267)
[ 90.714360][ T589] ? local_clock_noinstr (kernel/sched/clock.c:301)
[ 90.714729][ T589] ? local_clock_noinstr (kernel/sched/clock.c:301)
[ 90.715098][ T589] ? __lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4646)
[ 90.715457][ T589] lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825)
[ 90.715775][ T589] ? perf_event_ctx_lock_nested (kernel/events/core.c:1318)
[ 90.716196][ T589] ? __mutex_lock_common (kernel/locking/mutex.c:607)
[ 90.716571][ T589] ? __mutex_lock_common (kernel/locking/mutex.c:607)
[ 90.716963][ T589] __mutex_lock_common (kernel/locking/mutex.c:608)
[ 90.717328][ T589] ? perf_event_ctx_lock_nested (kernel/events/core.c:1318)
[ 90.717747][ T589] ? __this_cpu_preempt_check (lib/smp_processor_id.c:67)
[ 90.718136][ T589] mutex_lock_nested (kernel/locking/mutex.c:752 kernel/locking/mutex.c:804)
[ 90.718477][ T589] ? perf_event_ctx_lock_nested (kernel/events/core.c:1318)
[ 90.718898][ T589] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested (kernel/events/core.c:1318)
[ 90.719302][ T589] perf_mmap (kernel/events/core.c:? kernel/events/core.c:6812)
[ 90.719599][ T589] ? kmem_cache_alloc_noprof (mm/slub.c:4141)
[ 90.719988][ T589] ? kmem_cache_alloc_noprof (include/trace/events/kmem.h:12)
[ 90.720379][ T589] mmap_region (mm/mmap.c:1441)
[ 90.720728][ T589] do_mmap (mm/mmap.c:496)
[ 90.721046][ T589] vm_mmap_pgoff (mm/util.c:588)
[ 90.721387][ T589] ksys_mmap_pgoff (mm/mmap.c:542)
[ 90.721760][ T589] __ia32_sys_mmap_pgoff (mm/mmap.c:553 mm/mmap.c:549 mm/mmap.c:549)
[ 90.722126][ T589] ia32_sys_call (kbuild/obj/consumer/i386-randconfig-015-20241023/./arch/x86/include/generated/asm/syscalls_32.h:?)
[ 90.722462][ T589] do_int80_syscall_32 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:?)
[ 90.722826][ T589] ? exc_page_fault (arch/x86/mm/fault.c:1543)
[ 90.723163][ T589] entry_INT80_32 (arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S:944)
[ 90.723502][ T589] EIP: 0xa7fc5092
[ 90.723762][ T589] Code: 00 00 00 e9 90 ff ff ff ff a3 24 00 00 00 68 30 00 00 00 e9 80 ff ff ff ff a3 f8 ff ff ff 66 90 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 cd 80 <c3> 8d b4 26 00 00 00 00 8d b6 00 00 00 00 8b 1c 24 c3 8d b4 26 00
All code
========
0: 00 00 add %al,(%rax)
2: 00 e9 add %ch,%cl
4: 90 nop
5: ff (bad)
6: ff (bad)
7: ff (bad)
8: ff a3 24 00 00 00 jmp *0x24(%rbx)
e: 68 30 00 00 00 push $0x30
13: e9 80 ff ff ff jmp 0xffffffffffffff98
18: ff a3 f8 ff ff ff jmp *-0x8(%rbx)
1e: 66 90 xchg %ax,%ax
...
28: cd 80 int $0x80
2a:* c3 ret <-- trapping instruction
2b: 8d b4 26 00 00 00 00 lea 0x0(%rsi,%riz,1),%esi
32: 8d b6 00 00 00 00 lea 0x0(%rsi),%esi
38: 8b 1c 24 mov (%rsp),%ebx
3b: c3 ret
3c: 8d .byte 0x8d
3d: b4 26 mov $0x26,%ah
...
Code starting with the faulting instruction
===========================================
0: c3 ret
1: 8d b4 26 00 00 00 00 lea 0x0(%rsi,%riz,1),%esi
8: 8d b6 00 00 00 00 lea 0x0(%rsi),%esi
e: 8b 1c 24 mov (%rsp),%ebx
11: c3 ret
12: 8d .byte 0x8d
13: b4 26 mov $0x26,%ah
The kernel config and materials to reproduce are available at:
https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241025/202410251647.21bf487b-lkp@intel.com
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
next reply other threads:[~2024-10-25 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-25 8:37 kernel test robot [this message]
2024-10-25 10:05 ` [peterz-queue:perf/pmu-unregister] [perf] 24b8359383: WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected Peter Zijlstra
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=202410251647.21bf487b-lkp@intel.com \
--to=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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.