linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, tj@kernel.org, longman@redhat.com,
	johannes.berg@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: [PATCH v5 10/15] locking/lockdep: Reuse lock chains that have been freed
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 13:29:57 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181217213002.73776-11-bvanassche@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181217213002.73776-1-bvanassche@acm.org>

A previous patch introduced a lock chain leak. Fix that leak by reusing
lock chains that have been freed.

Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index a71ca42978c2..3a63142d4764 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -299,6 +299,7 @@ static struct pending_free {
 	struct rcu_head	 rcu_head;
 	bool		 scheduled;
 	DECLARE_BITMAP(list_entries_being_freed, MAX_LOCKDEP_ENTRIES);
+	DECLARE_BITMAP(lock_chains_being_freed, MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS);
 } pending_free[2];
 static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(rcu_cb);
 
@@ -2097,8 +2098,8 @@ check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static unsigned long nr_lock_chains;
 struct lock_chain lock_chains[MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS];
+static DECLARE_BITMAP(lock_chains_in_use, MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS);
 int nr_chain_hlocks;
 static u16 chain_hlocks[MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS];
 
@@ -2237,12 +2238,25 @@ static int check_no_collision(struct task_struct *curr,
  */
 long lockdep_next_lockchain(long i)
 {
-	return i + 1 < nr_lock_chains ? i + 1 : -2;
+	i = find_next_bit(lock_chains_in_use, ARRAY_SIZE(lock_chains), i + 1);
+	return i < ARRAY_SIZE(lock_chains) ? i : -2;
 }
 
 unsigned long lock_chain_count(void)
 {
-	return nr_lock_chains;
+	return bitmap_weight(lock_chains_in_use, ARRAY_SIZE(lock_chains));
+}
+
+/* Must be called with the graph lock held. */
+static struct lock_chain *alloc_lock_chain(void)
+{
+	int idx = find_first_zero_bit(lock_chains_in_use,
+				      ARRAY_SIZE(lock_chains));
+
+	if (unlikely(idx >= ARRAY_SIZE(lock_chains)))
+		return NULL;
+	__set_bit(idx, lock_chains_in_use);
+	return lock_chains + idx;
 }
 
 /*
@@ -2261,20 +2275,8 @@ static inline int add_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr,
 	struct lock_chain *chain;
 	int i, j;
 
-	/*
-	 * Allocate a new chain entry from the static array, and add
-	 * it to the hash:
-	 */
-
-	/*
-	 * We might need to take the graph lock, ensure we've got IRQs
-	 * disabled to make this an IRQ-safe lock.. for recursion reasons
-	 * lockdep won't complain about its own locking errors.
-	 */
-	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()))
-		return 0;
-
-	if (unlikely(nr_lock_chains >= MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS)) {
+	chain = alloc_lock_chain();
+	if (!chain) {
 		if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
 			return 0;
 
@@ -2282,7 +2284,6 @@ static inline int add_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr,
 		dump_stack();
 		return 0;
 	}
-	chain = lock_chains + nr_lock_chains++;
 	chain->chain_key = chain_key;
 	chain->irq_context = hlock->irq_context;
 	i = get_first_held_lock(curr, hlock);
@@ -4219,7 +4220,8 @@ void lockdep_reset(void)
 }
 
 /* Remove a class from a lock chain. Must be called with the graph lock held. */
-static void remove_class_from_lock_chain(struct lock_chain *chain,
+static void remove_class_from_lock_chain(struct pending_free *pf,
+					 struct lock_chain *chain,
 					 struct lock_class *class)
 {
 #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
@@ -4257,6 +4259,7 @@ static void remove_class_from_lock_chain(struct lock_chain *chain,
 	 * hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() loop is safe.
 	 */
 	hlist_del_rcu(&chain->entry);
+	__set_bit(chain - lock_chains, pf->lock_chains_being_freed);
 	if (chain->depth == 0)
 		return;
 	/*
@@ -4265,22 +4268,19 @@ static void remove_class_from_lock_chain(struct lock_chain *chain,
 	 */
 	if (lookup_chain_cache(chain_key))
 		return;
-	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(nr_lock_chains >= MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS)) {
+	new_chain = alloc_lock_chain();
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!new_chain)) {
 		debug_locks_off();
 		return;
 	}
-	/*
-	 * Leak *chain because it is not safe to reinsert it before an RCU
-	 * grace period has expired.
-	 */
-	new_chain = lock_chains + nr_lock_chains++;
 	*new_chain = *chain;
 	hlist_add_head_rcu(&new_chain->entry, chainhashentry(chain_key));
 #endif
 }
 
 /* Must be called with the graph lock held. */
-static void remove_class_from_lock_chains(struct lock_class *class)
+static void remove_class_from_lock_chains(struct pending_free *pf,
+					  struct lock_class *class)
 {
 	struct lock_chain *chain;
 	struct hlist_head *head;
@@ -4289,7 +4289,7 @@ static void remove_class_from_lock_chains(struct lock_class *class)
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(chainhash_table); i++) {
 		head = chainhash_table + i;
 		hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(chain, head, entry) {
-			remove_class_from_lock_chain(chain, class);
+			remove_class_from_lock_chain(pf, chain, class);
 		}
 	}
 }
@@ -4329,7 +4329,7 @@ static void zap_class(struct pending_free *pf, struct lock_class *class)
 			  class->name);
 	}
 
-	remove_class_from_lock_chains(class);
+	remove_class_from_lock_chains(pf, class);
 }
 
 static void reinit_class(struct lock_class *class)
@@ -4378,6 +4378,11 @@ static void free_zapped_classes(struct rcu_head *ch)
 	bitmap_andnot(list_entries_in_use, list_entries_in_use,
 		      pf->list_entries_being_freed, ARRAY_SIZE(list_entries));
 	bitmap_clear(pf->list_entries_being_freed, 0, ARRAY_SIZE(list_entries));
+#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
+	bitmap_andnot(lock_chains_in_use, lock_chains_in_use,
+		      pf->lock_chains_being_freed, ARRAY_SIZE(lock_chains));
+	bitmap_clear(pf->lock_chains_being_freed, 0, ARRAY_SIZE(lock_chains));
+#endif
 	graph_unlock();
 restore_irqs:
 	raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
-- 
2.20.0.405.gbc1bbc6f85-goog


  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-12-17 21:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-17 21:29 [PATCH v5 00/15] locking/lockdep: Add support for dynamic keys Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 01/15] locking/lockdep: Fix required memory size reported if CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=n Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 02/15] locking/lockdep: Make zap_class() remove all matching lock order entries Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 03/15] locking/lockdep: Reorder struct lock_class members Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 04/15] locking/lockdep: Initialize the locks_before and locks_after lists earlier Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 05/15] locking/lockdep: Split lockdep_free_key_range() and lockdep_reset_lock() Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 06/15] locking/lockdep: Make it easy to detect whether or not inside a selftest Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 07/15] locking/lockdep: Free lock classes that are no longer in use Bart Van Assche
2019-01-10 15:20   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-10 15:45     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-10 15:24   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-10 18:51     ` Bart Van Assche
2019-01-10 19:44       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-10 21:56         ` Bart Van Assche
2019-01-11  8:35           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-13  0:42     ` Bart Van Assche
2019-01-10 15:28   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-10 19:31     ` Bart Van Assche
2019-01-10 19:47       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 08/15] locking/lockdep: Reuse list entries " Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 09/15] locking/lockdep: Introduce lockdep_next_lockchain() and lock_chain_count() Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:29 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 11/15] locking/lockdep: Check data structure consistency Bart Van Assche
2019-01-10 15:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-10 15:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-12-17 21:29 ` [PATCH v5 12/15] locking/lockdep: Verify whether lock objects are small enough to be used as class keys Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:30 ` [PATCH v5 13/15] locking/lockdep: Add support for dynamic keys Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:30 ` [PATCH v5 14/15] kernel/workqueue: Use dynamic lockdep keys for workqueues Bart Van Assche
2018-12-17 21:30 ` [PATCH v5 15/15] lockdep tests: Test dynamic key registration Bart Van Assche

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=20181217213002.73776-11-bvanassche@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=johannes.berg@intel.com \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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).