* Re: [PATCH] rcu: Add missing unlock in rcu_print_task_stall
[not found] <20210727074542.25095-1-cheng-jui.wang@mediatek.com>
@ 2021-07-27 15:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2021-07-27 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cheng Jui Wang
Cc: rcu, linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
clang-built-linux, josh, rostedt, mathieu.desnoyers, jiangshanlai,
joel, matthias.bgg, nathan, ndesaulniers, wsd_upstream,
eason-yh.lin
On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 03:45:42PM +0800, Cheng Jui Wang wrote:
> We encouterd a deadlock with following lockdep warning. The
> rcu_print_task_stall is supposed to release rnp->lock, but may just
> return without unlock.
>
> if (!rcu_preempt_blocked_readers_cgp(rnp))
> return 0;
>
> Add missing unlock before return to fix it.
>
> ============================================
> WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
> 5.10.43
> --------------------------------------------
> swapper/7/0 is trying to acquire lock:
> ffffffc01268c018 (rcu_node_0){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: rcu_dump_cpu_stacks+0x94/0x138
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> ffffffc01268c018 (rcu_node_0){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: check_cpu_stall+0x34c/0x6f8
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0
> ----
> lock(rcu_node_0);
> lock(rcu_node_0);
>
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> May be due to missing lock nesting notation
>
> 1 lock held by swapper/7/0:
> #0: ffffffc01268c018 (rcu_node_0){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: check_cpu_stall+0x34c/0x6f8
>
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 7 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/7
> Call trace:
> dump_backtrace.cfi_jt+0x0/0x8
> show_stack+0x1c/0x2c
> dump_stack_lvl+0xd8/0x16c
> validate_chain+0x2124/0x2d34
> __lock_acquire+0x7e4/0xed4
> lock_acquire+0x114/0x394
> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x88/0xd4
> rcu_dump_cpu_stacks+0x94/0x138
> check_cpu_stall+0x498/0x6f8
> rcu_sched_clock_irq+0xd4/0x214
> update_process_times+0xb4/0xf4
> tick_sched_timer+0x98/0x110
> __hrtimer_run_queues+0x19c/0x2bc
> hrtimer_interrupt+0x10c/0x3a8
> arch_timer_handler_phys+0x5c/0x98
> handle_percpu_devid_irq+0xe0/0x2a8
> __handle_domain_irq+0xd0/0x19c
> gic_handle_irq+0x6c/0x134
> el1_irq+0xe0/0x1c0
> arch_cpu_idle+0x1c/0x30
> default_idle_call+0x58/0xcc
> do_idle.llvm.13807299673429836468+0x118/0x2e8
> cpu_startup_entry+0x28/0x2c
> secondary_start_kernel+0x1d0/0x23c
>
> Signed-off-by: Cheng Jui Wang <cheng-jui.wang@mediatek.com>
Good catch, thank you!
However, Yanfei Xu beat you to this with commit f6b3995a8b56dc ("rcu:
Fix stall-warning deadlock due to non-release of rcu_node ->lock"),
which is in -rcu and slated for the upcoming merge window.
His commit 8baded711edc ("rcu: Fix to include first blocked task in
stall warning") might also be of interest to you.
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree_stall.h | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_stall.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_stall.h
> index 6c76988cc019..3dc464d4d9a5 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_stall.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_stall.h
> @@ -267,8 +267,10 @@ static int rcu_print_task_stall(struct rcu_node *rnp, unsigned long flags)
> struct task_struct *ts[8];
>
> lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> - if (!rcu_preempt_blocked_readers_cgp(rnp))
> + if (!rcu_preempt_blocked_readers_cgp(rnp)) {
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
> return 0;
> + }
> pr_err("\tTasks blocked on level-%d rcu_node (CPUs %d-%d):",
> rnp->level, rnp->grplo, rnp->grphi);
> t = list_entry(rnp->gp_tasks->prev,
> --
> 2.18.0
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread