From: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Qais Yousef <qyousef@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@google.com>,
Youssef Esmat <youssefesmat@google.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
kernel-team@android.com, "Connor O'Brien" <connoro@google.com>,
John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 03/19] locking/mutex: make mutex::wait_lock irq safe
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2023 06:08:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230819060915.3001568-4-jstultz@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230819060915.3001568-1-jstultz@google.com>
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
mutex::wait_lock might be nested under rq->lock.
Make it irq safe then.
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Cc: Qais Yousef <qyousef@google.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Cc: Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@google.com>
Cc: Youssef Esmat <youssefesmat@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com
Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
[rebase & fix {un,}lock_wait_lock helpers in ww_mutex.h]
Signed-off-by: Connor O'Brien <connoro@google.com>
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
---
v3:
* Re-added this patch after it was dropped in v2 which
caused lockdep warnings to trip.
---
kernel/locking/mutex.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
kernel/locking/ww_mutex.h | 22 +++++++++++-----------
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index 118b6412845c..ef56556d6ab9 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -573,6 +573,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int state, unsigned int subclas
DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
struct mutex_waiter waiter;
struct ww_mutex *ww;
+ unsigned long flags;
int ret;
if (!use_ww_ctx)
@@ -615,7 +616,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int state, unsigned int subclas
return 0;
}
- raw_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
/*
* After waiting to acquire the wait_lock, try again.
*/
@@ -676,7 +677,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int state, unsigned int subclas
goto err;
}
- raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
/* Make sure we do wakeups before calling schedule */
wake_up_q(&wake_q);
wake_q_init(&wake_q);
@@ -701,9 +702,9 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int state, unsigned int subclas
trace_contention_begin(lock, LCB_F_MUTEX);
}
- raw_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
}
- raw_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
acquired:
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
@@ -729,7 +730,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int state, unsigned int subclas
if (ww_ctx)
ww_mutex_lock_acquired(ww, ww_ctx);
- raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
wake_up_q(&wake_q);
preempt_enable();
return 0;
@@ -739,7 +740,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int state, unsigned int subclas
__mutex_remove_waiter(lock, &waiter);
err_early_kill:
trace_contention_end(lock, ret);
- raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
debug_mutex_free_waiter(&waiter);
mutex_release(&lock->dep_map, ip);
wake_up_q(&wake_q);
@@ -910,6 +911,7 @@ static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigne
struct task_struct *next = NULL;
DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
unsigned long owner;
+ unsigned long flags;
mutex_release(&lock->dep_map, ip);
@@ -936,7 +938,7 @@ static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigne
}
}
- raw_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
debug_mutex_unlock(lock);
if (!list_empty(&lock->wait_list)) {
/* get the first entry from the wait-list: */
@@ -954,7 +956,7 @@ static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigne
__mutex_handoff(lock, next);
preempt_disable();
- raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
wake_up_q(&wake_q);
preempt_enable();
diff --git a/kernel/locking/ww_mutex.h b/kernel/locking/ww_mutex.h
index 7189c6631d90..8b94f4b89e74 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/ww_mutex.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/ww_mutex.h
@@ -70,14 +70,14 @@ __ww_mutex_has_waiters(struct mutex *lock)
return atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & MUTEX_FLAG_WAITERS;
}
-static inline void lock_wait_lock(struct mutex *lock)
+static inline void lock_wait_lock(struct mutex *lock, unsigned long *flags)
{
- raw_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->wait_lock, *flags);
}
-static inline void unlock_wait_lock(struct mutex *lock)
+static inline void unlock_wait_lock(struct mutex *lock, unsigned long flags)
{
- raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
}
static inline void lockdep_assert_wait_lock_held(struct mutex *lock)
@@ -144,14 +144,14 @@ __ww_mutex_has_waiters(struct rt_mutex *lock)
return rt_mutex_has_waiters(&lock->rtmutex);
}
-static inline void lock_wait_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock)
+static inline void lock_wait_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock, unsigned long *flags)
{
- raw_spin_lock(&lock->rtmutex.wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->rtmutex.wait_lock, *flags);
}
-static inline void unlock_wait_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock)
+static inline void unlock_wait_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock, flags)
{
- raw_spin_unlock(&lock->rtmutex.wait_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->rtmutex.wait_lock, flags);
}
static inline void lockdep_assert_wait_lock_held(struct rt_mutex *lock)
@@ -380,6 +380,7 @@ static __always_inline void
ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
{
DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
+ unsigned long flags;
ww_mutex_lock_acquired(lock, ctx);
@@ -408,10 +409,9 @@ ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
* Uh oh, we raced in fastpath, check if any of the waiters need to
* die or wound us.
*/
- lock_wait_lock(&lock->base);
+ lock_wait_lock(&lock->base, &flags);
__ww_mutex_check_waiters(&lock->base, ctx, &wake_q);
- unlock_wait_lock(&lock->base);
-
+ unlock_wait_lock(&lock->base, flags);
wake_up_q(&wake_q);
}
--
2.42.0.rc1.204.g551eb34607-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-19 6:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-19 6:08 [PATCH v5 00/19] Proxy Execution: A generalized form of Priority Inheritance v5 John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 01/19] sched: Unify runtime accounting across classes John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 02/19] locking/mutex: Removes wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock John Stultz
2023-08-22 19:11 ` Waiman Long
2023-08-22 19:24 ` John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` John Stultz [this message]
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 04/19] locking/mutex: Expose __mutex_owner() John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 05/19] locking/mutex: Rework task_struct::blocked_on John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 06/19] locking/mutex: Add task_struct::blocked_lock to serialize changes to the blocked_on state John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 07/19] locking/mutex: Add p->blocked_on wrappers for correctness checks John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 08/19] locking/mutex: Split blocked_on logic into two states (blocked_on and blocked_on_waking) John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 09/19] locking/mutex: Switch to mutex handoffs for CONFIG_PROXY_EXEC John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 10/19] sched: Split scheduler execution context John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 11/19] sched: Fix runtime accounting w/ split exec & sched contexts John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 12/19] sched: Unnest ttwu_runnable in prep for proxy-execution John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 13/19] sched: Split out __sched() deactivate task logic into a helper John Stultz
2023-08-23 21:12 ` kernel test robot
2023-08-23 21:25 ` John Stultz
2023-08-24 0:00 ` kernel test robot
2023-08-24 0:34 ` kernel test robot
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 14/19] sched: Add a very simple proxy() function John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 15/19] sched: Add proxy deactivate helper John Stultz
2023-08-24 11:34 ` kernel test robot
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 16/19] sched: Fix proxy/current (push,pull)ability John Stultz
2023-08-22 15:20 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-08-22 16:19 ` John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 17/19] sched: Start blocked_on chain processing in proxy() John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 18/19] sched: Handle blocked-waiter migration (and return migration) John Stultz
2023-08-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v5 19/19] sched: Add blocked_donor link to task for smarter mutex handoffs John Stultz
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=20230819060915.3001568-4-jstultz@google.com \
--to=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=connoro@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qyousef@google.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=youssefesmat@google.com \
--cc=zezeozue@google.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