public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/mq: Cure cpu hotplug lock inversion
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 08:27:01 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170504142700.GD9292@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170504141849.caxfp4b4k3qnrvr4@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Thu, May 04 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:56:57AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 05/04/2017 07:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > 
> > > By poking at /debug/sched_features I triggered the following splat:
> > > 
> > >  [] ======================================================
> > >  [] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > >  [] 4.11.0-00873-g964c8b7-dirty #694 Not tainted
> > >  [] ------------------------------------------------------
> > >  [] bash/2109 is trying to acquire lock:
> > >  []  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff8120cb8b>] static_key_slow_dec+0x1b/0x50
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] but task is already holding lock:
> > >  []  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4){+++++.}, at: [<ffffffff81140216>] sched_feat_write+0x86/0x170
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] -> #2 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4){+++++.}:
> > >  []        lock_acquire+0x100/0x210
> > >  []        down_write+0x28/0x60
> > >  []        start_creating+0x5e/0xf0
> > >  []        debugfs_create_dir+0x13/0x110
> > >  []        blk_mq_debugfs_register+0x21/0x70
> > >  []        blk_mq_register_dev+0x64/0xd0
> > >  []        blk_register_queue+0x6a/0x170
> > >  []        device_add_disk+0x22d/0x440
> > >  []        loop_add+0x1f3/0x280
> > >  []        loop_init+0x104/0x142
> > >  []        do_one_initcall+0x43/0x180
> > >  []        kernel_init_freeable+0x1de/0x266
> > >  []        kernel_init+0xe/0x100
> > >  []        ret_from_fork+0x31/0x40
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] -> #1 (all_q_mutex){+.+.+.}:
> > >  []        lock_acquire+0x100/0x210
> > >  []        __mutex_lock+0x6c/0x960
> > >  []        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
> > >  []        blk_mq_init_allocated_queue+0x37c/0x4e0
> > >  []        blk_mq_init_queue+0x3a/0x60
> > >  []        loop_add+0xe5/0x280
> > >  []        loop_init+0x104/0x142
> > >  []        do_one_initcall+0x43/0x180
> > >  []        kernel_init_freeable+0x1de/0x266
> > >  []        kernel_init+0xe/0x100
> > >  []        ret_from_fork+0x31/0x40
> > > 
> > >  []  *** DEADLOCK ***
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] 3 locks held by bash/2109:
> > >  []  #0:  (sb_writers#11){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff81292bcd>] vfs_write+0x17d/0x1a0
> > >  []  #1:  (debugfs_srcu){......}, at: [<ffffffff8155a90d>] full_proxy_write+0x5d/0xd0
> > >  []  #2:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4){+++++.}, at: [<ffffffff81140216>] sched_feat_write+0x86/0x170
> > >  [] 
> > >  [] stack backtrace:
> > >  [] CPU: 9 PID: 2109 Comm: bash Not tainted 4.11.0-00873-g964c8b7-dirty #694
> > >  [] Hardware name: Intel Corporation S2600GZ/S2600GZ, BIOS SE5C600.86B.02.02.0002.122320131210 12/23/2013
> > >  [] Call Trace:
> > > 
> > >  []  lock_acquire+0x100/0x210
> > >  []  get_online_cpus+0x2a/0x90
> > >  []  static_key_slow_dec+0x1b/0x50
> > >  []  static_key_disable+0x20/0x30
> > >  []  sched_feat_write+0x131/0x170
> > >  []  full_proxy_write+0x97/0xd0
> > >  []  __vfs_write+0x28/0x120
> > >  []  vfs_write+0xb5/0x1a0
> > >  []  SyS_write+0x49/0xa0
> > >  []  entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x23/0xc2
> > > 
> > > This is because of the cpu hotplug lock rework. Break the chain at #1
> > > by reversing the lock acquisition order. This way i_mutex_key#4 no
> > > longer depends on cpu_hotplug_lock and things are good.
> > 
> > Thanks Peter, applied.
> 
> Note that the hotplug rework is still work-in-progress and lives in a
> -tip branch.
> 
> That said, the patch is harmless outside of that, so yes it can travel
> upstream independently. But note that mainline cannot yet trigger that
> splat.

Yes, may as well just get it in and avoid any dependencies.

-- 
Jens Axboe

      reply	other threads:[~2017-05-04 14:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-04 13:05 [PATCH] block/mq: Cure cpu hotplug lock inversion Peter Zijlstra
2017-05-04 13:56 ` Jens Axboe
2017-05-04 14:18   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-05-04 14:27     ` Jens Axboe [this message]

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=20170504142700.GD9292@kernel.dk \
    --to=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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