From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: bigeasy@linutronix.de, tglx@linutronix.de
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
bsegall@google.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, swood@redhat.com,
bristot@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, mingo@redhat.com,
jstultz@google.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, mgorman@suse.de,
rostedt@goodmis.org, vschneid@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, longman@redhat.com, will@kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 6/6] locking/rtmutex: Add a lockdep assert to catch potential nested blocking
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2023 13:01:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230815111430.488430699@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20230815110121.117752409@infradead.org
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
There used to be a BUG_ON(current->pi_blocked_on) in the lock acquisition
functions, but that vanished in one of the rtmutex overhauls.
Bring it back in form of a lockdep assert to catch code paths which take
rtmutex based locks with current::pi_blocked_on != NULL.
Reported-by: Crystal Wood <swood@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230427111937.2745231-5-bigeasy@linutronix.de
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 2 ++
kernel/locking/rwbase_rt.c | 2 ++
kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c | 2 ++
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1774,6 +1774,8 @@ static int __sched rt_mutex_slowlock(str
static __always_inline int __rt_mutex_lock(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
unsigned int state)
{
+ lockdep_assert(!current->pi_blocked_on);
+
if (likely(rt_mutex_try_acquire(lock)))
return 0;
--- a/kernel/locking/rwbase_rt.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwbase_rt.c
@@ -131,6 +131,8 @@ static int __sched __rwbase_read_lock(st
static __always_inline int rwbase_read_lock(struct rwbase_rt *rwb,
unsigned int state)
{
+ lockdep_assert(!current->pi_blocked_on);
+
if (rwbase_read_trylock(rwb))
return 0;
--- a/kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c
@@ -37,6 +37,8 @@
static __always_inline void rtlock_lock(struct rt_mutex_base *rtm)
{
+ lockdep_assert(!current->pi_blocked_on);
+
if (unlikely(!rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire(rtm, NULL, current)))
rtlock_slowlock(rtm);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-15 11:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-15 11:01 [PATCH 0/6] locking/rtmutex: Avoid PI state recursion through sched_submit_work() Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-15 11:01 ` [PATCH 1/6] sched: Constrain locks in sched_submit_work() Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-15 11:01 ` [PATCH 2/6] locking/rtmutex: Avoid unconditional slowpath for DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-15 11:01 ` [PATCH 3/6] sched: Extract __schedule_loop() Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-15 22:33 ` Phil Auld
2023-08-15 22:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 14:14 ` Phil Auld
2023-08-15 22:42 ` Phil Auld
2023-08-16 10:01 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-08-16 11:39 ` Phil Auld
2023-08-16 12:20 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-08-16 12:48 ` Phil Auld
2023-08-15 11:01 ` [PATCH 4/6] sched: Provide rt_mutex specific scheduler helpers Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-15 11:01 ` [PATCH 5/6] locking/rtmutex: Use " Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-15 11:01 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2023-08-15 16:15 ` [PATCH 0/6] locking/rtmutex: Avoid PI state recursion through sched_submit_work() Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 8:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-08-16 9:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 10:19 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-08-16 13:46 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-08-16 14:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 15:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 15:25 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-08-17 6:59 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-08-17 8:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20230815111430.488430699@infradead.org \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=swood@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=will@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