From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Joerg Vehlow <lkml@jv-coder.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Joerg Vehlow <joerg.vehlow@aox-tech.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG RT] dump-capture kernel not executed for panic in interrupt context
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 17:03:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200821170334.73b52fdd@oasis.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200821134753.9547695c9b782275be3c95b5@linux-foundation.org>
On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 13:47:53 -0700
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 11:08:48 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:25:33 +0200
> > Joerg Vehlow <lkml@jv-coder.de> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Andrew and Others (please read at least the part with @RT developers),
> > >
> > > > Yup, mutex_trylock() from interrupt is improper. Well dang, that's a
> > > > bit silly. Presumably the 2006 spin_lock_mutex() wasn't taken with
> > > > irqs-off.
> > > >
> > > > Ho hum, did you look at switching the kexec code back to the xchg
> > > > approach?
> > > >
> > > I looked into reverting to the xchg approach, but that seems to be
> > > not a good solution anymore, because the mutex is used in many places,
> > > a lot with waiting locks and I guess that would require spinning now,
> > > if we do this with bare xchg.
> > >
> > > Instead I thought about using a spinlock, because they are supposed
> > > to be used in interrupt context as well, if I understand the documentation
> > > correctly ([1]).
> > > @RT developers
> > > Unfortunately the rt patches seem to interpret it a bit different and
> > > spin_trylock uses __rt_mutex_trylock again, with the same consequences as
> > > with the current code.
> > >
> > > I tried raw_spinlocks, but it looks like they result in a deadlock at
> > > least in the rt kernel. Thiy may be because of memory allocations in the
> > > critical sections, that are not allowed if I understand it correctly.
> > >
> > > I have no clue how to fix it at this point.
> > >
> > > Jörg
> > >
> > > [1] https://kernel.readthedocs.io/en/sphinx-samples/kernel-locking.html
> >
> > There's only two places that wait on the mutex, and all other places
> > try to get it, and if it fails, it simply exits.
> >
> > What I would do is introduce a kexec_busy counter, and have something
> > like this:
> >
> > For the two locations that actually wait on the mutex:
> >
> > loop:
> > mutex_lock(&kexec_mutex);
> > ret = atomic_inc_return(&kexec_busy);
> > if (ret > 1) {
> > /* Atomic context is busy on this counter, spin */
> > atomic_dec(&kexec_busy);
> > mutex_unlock(&kexec_mutex);
> > goto loop;
> > }
> > [..]
> > atomic_dec(&kexec_busy);
> > mutex_unlock(&kexec_mutex);
> >
> > And then all the other places that do the trylock:
> >
> > cant_sleep();
> > ret = atomic_inc_return(&kexec_busy);
> > if (ret > 1) {
> > atomic_dec(&kexec_busy);
> > return;
> > }
> > [..]
> > atomic_dec(&kexec_busy);
>
> Aw gee. Hide all this in include/linux/rostedt_lock.h...
Heh, if this was the way to go, I would have definitely recommended
packaging that up in static inline functions in some local header. Not
necessarily rostedt_lock.h, but I'll use that if people let me :-)
>
> Sigh. Is it too hard to make mutex_trylock() usable from interrupt
> context?
That's a question for Thomas and Peter Z.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-21 21:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-28 11:41 [BUG RT] dump-capture kernel not executed for panic in interrupt context Joerg Vehlow
2020-05-28 12:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-07-22 4:30 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-07-22 20:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-07-27 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
2020-08-21 10:25 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-08-21 15:08 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-08-21 20:47 ` Andrew Morton
2020-08-21 21:03 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2020-08-22 12:32 ` peterz
2020-08-22 23:49 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-07 11:41 ` peterz
2020-09-07 12:49 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-14 19:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-07 10:51 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-09-07 11:46 ` peterz
2020-09-07 12:03 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-09-07 16:23 ` peterz
2020-09-08 5:48 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-09-09 5:46 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-09-11 22:48 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-09-14 6:03 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-09-14 16:46 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=20200821170334.73b52fdd@oasis.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=joerg.vehlow@aox-tech.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkml@jv-coder.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/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