From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, walken@google.com,
boqun.feng@gmail.com, kirill@shutemov.name,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org,
npiggin@gmail.com, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/16] lockdep: Detect and handle hist_lock ring buffer overwrite
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:57:46 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170713085746.GH20323@X58A-UD3R> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170713081442.GA439@worktop>
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 10:14:42AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:07:45AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > Does my approach have problems, rewinding to 'original idx' on exit and
> > deciding whether overwrite or not? I think, this way, no need to do the
> > drastic work. Or.. does my one get more overhead in usual case?
>
> So I think that invalidating just the one entry doesn't work; the moment
I think invalidating just the one is enough. After rewinding, the entry
will be invalidated and the ring buffer starts to be filled forward from
the point with valid ones. When commit, it will proceed backward with
valid ones until meeting the invalidated entry and stop.
IOW, in case of (overwritten)
rewind to here
|
ppppppppppiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
invalidate it on exit_irq
and start to fill from here again
|
pppppppppxiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
when commit occurs here
|
pppppppppxpppppppppppiiiii
do commit within this range
|<---------|
pppppppppxpppppppppppiiiii
So I think this works and is much simple. Anything I missed?
> you fill that up the iteration in commit_xhlocks() will again use the
> next one etc.. even though you wanted it not to.
>
> So we need to wipe the _entire_ history.
>
> So I _think_ the below should work, but its not been near a compiler.
>
>
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -822,6 +822,7 @@ struct task_struct {
> unsigned int xhlock_idx_soft; /* For restoring at softirq exit */
> unsigned int xhlock_idx_hard; /* For restoring at hardirq exit */
> unsigned int xhlock_idx_hist; /* For restoring at history boundaries */
> + unsigned int xhlock_idX_max;
> #endif
> #ifdef CONFIG_UBSAN
> unsigned int in_ubsan;
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -4746,6 +4746,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(lockdep_rcu_suspicious
> static atomic_t cross_gen_id; /* Can be wrapped */
>
> /*
> + * make xhlock_valid() false.
> + */
> +static inline void invalidate_xhlock(struct hist_lock *xhlock)
> +{
> + xhlock->hlock.instance = NULL;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> * Lock history stacks; we have 3 nested lock history stacks:
> *
> * Hard IRQ
> @@ -4764,28 +4772,58 @@ static atomic_t cross_gen_id; /* Can be
> * MAX_XHLOCKS_NR ? Possibly re-instroduce hist_gen_id ?
> */
>
> -void crossrelease_hardirq_start(void)
> +static inline void __crossrelease_start(unsigned int *stamp)
> {
> if (current->xhlocks)
> - current->xhlock_idx_hard = current->xhlock_idx;
> + *stamp = current->xhlock_idx;
> +}
> +
> +static void __crossrelease_end(unsigned int *stamp)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + if (!current->xhlocks)
> + return;
> +
> + current->xhlock_idx = *stamp;
> +
> + /*
> + * If we rewind past the tail; all of history is lost.
> + */
> + if ((current->xhlock_idx_max - *stamp) < MAX_XHLOCKS_NR)
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> + * Invalidate the entire history..
> + */
> + for (i = 0; i < MAX_XHLOCKS_NR; i++)
> + invalidate_xhlock(&xhlock(i));
> +
> + current->xhlock_idx = 0;
> + current->xhlock_idx_hard = 0;
> + current->xhlock_idx_soft = 0;
> + current->xhlock_idx_hist = 0;
> + current->xhlock_idx_max = 0;
> +}
> +
> +void crossrelease_hardirq_start(void)
> +{
> + __crossrelease_start(¤t->xhlock_idx_hard);
> }
>
> void crossrelease_hardirq_end(void)
> {
> - if (current->xhlocks)
> - current->xhlock_idx = current->xhlock_idx_hard;
> + __crossrelease_end(¤t->xhlock_idx_hard);
> }
>
> void crossrelease_softirq_start(void)
> {
> - if (current->xhlocks)
> - current->xhlock_idx_soft = current->xhlock_idx;
> + __crossrelease_start(¤t->xhlock_idx_soft);
> }
>
> void crossrelease_softirq_end(void)
> {
> - if (current->xhlocks)
> - current->xhlock_idx = current->xhlock_idx_soft;
> + __crossrelease_end(¤t->xhlock_idx_soft);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -4806,14 +4844,12 @@ void crossrelease_softirq_end(void)
> */
> void crossrelease_hist_start(void)
> {
> - if (current->xhlocks)
> - current->xhlock_idx_hist = current->xhlock_idx;
> + __crossrelease_start(¤t->xhlock_idx_hist);
> }
>
> void crossrelease_hist_end(void)
> {
> - if (current->xhlocks)
> - current->xhlock_idx = current->xhlock_idx_hist;
> + __crossrelease_end(¤t->xhlock_idx_hist);
> }
>
> static int cross_lock(struct lockdep_map *lock)
> @@ -4880,6 +4916,9 @@ static void add_xhlock(struct held_lock
> unsigned int idx = ++current->xhlock_idx;
> struct hist_lock *xhlock = &xhlock(idx);
>
> + if ((int)(current->xhlock_idx_max - idx) < 0)
> + current->xhlock_idx_max = idx;
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP
> /*
> * This can be done locklessly because they are all task-local
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-13 8:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-24 8:59 [PATCH v7 00/16] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 01/16] lockdep: Refactor lookup_chain_cache() Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 02/16] lockdep: Add a function building a chain between two classes Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 03/16] lockdep: Change the meaning of check_prev_add()'s return value Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 04/16] lockdep: Make check_prev_add() able to handle external stack_trace Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 05/16] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park
2017-06-13 0:33 ` Byungchul Park
2017-06-22 23:27 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-11 16:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-12 2:24 ` Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 06/16] lockdep: Detect and handle hist_lock ring buffer overwrite Byungchul Park
2017-07-11 16:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-12 2:00 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-12 7:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 2:07 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-13 8:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 8:57 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-07-13 9:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 10:09 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-13 10:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 11:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 11:23 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-14 1:41 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-14 6:42 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-21 13:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-25 6:29 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-25 8:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 11:19 ` Byungchul Park
2017-07-18 1:25 ` Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 07/16] lockdep: Handle non(or multi)-acquisition of a crosslock Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 08/16] lockdep: Avoid adding redundant direct links of crosslocks Byungchul Park
2017-07-25 15:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-26 7:16 ` Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 09/16] lockdep: Fix incorrect condition to print bug msgs for MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 10/16] lockdep: Make print_circular_bug() aware of crossrelease Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 11/16] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to completions Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 12/16] pagemap.h: Remove trailing white space Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 13/16] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 14/16] lockdep: Apply lock_acquire(release) on __Set(__Clear)PageLocked Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 15/16] lockdep: Move data of CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK from page to page_ext Byungchul Park
2017-05-24 8:59 ` [PATCH v7 16/16] lockdep: Crossrelease feature documentation Byungchul Park
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=20170713085746.GH20323@X58A-UD3R \
--to=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--cc=willy@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).