From: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Benjamin Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@google.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Metin Kaya <Metin.Kaya@arm.com>,
Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@gmail.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
kernel-team@android.com, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
regressions@lists.linux.dev,
Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:52:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241113215252.3977066-1-jstultz@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6afb936f-17c7-43fa-90e0-b9e780866097@app.fastmail.com>
Anders had bisected a crash using PREEMPT_RT with linux-next and
isolated it down to commit 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove
wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock"), where it seemed the
wake_q structure was somehow getting corrupted causing a null
pointer traversal.
I was able to easily repoduce this with PREEMPT_RT and managed
to isolate down that through various call stacks we were
actually calling wake_up_q() twice on the same wake_q.
I found that in the problematic commit, I had added the
wake_up_q() call in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() around
__ww_mutex_add_waiter(), following a similar pattern in
__mutex_lock_common().
However, its just wrong. We haven't dropped the lock->wait_lock,
so its contrary to the point of the original patch. And it
didn't match the __mutex_lock_common() logic of re-initializing
the wake_q after calling it midway in the stack.
Looking at it now, the wake_up_q() call is incorrect and should
just be removed. So drop the erronious logic I had added.
Anders: Can you double check this resolves the issue for you?
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Cc: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
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: Benjamin Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Cc: Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
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: Metin Kaya <Metin.Kaya@arm.com>
Cc: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@gmail.com>
Cc: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: regressions@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
Cc: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Fixes: 894d1b3db41c ("locking/mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock")
Reported-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6afb936f-17c7-43fa-90e0-b9e780866097@app.fastmail.com/
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index c7de80ee1f9d..a01e81179df0 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1248,10 +1248,7 @@ static int __sched task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
/* Check whether the waiter should back out immediately */
rtm = container_of(lock, struct rt_mutex, rtmutex);
- preempt_disable();
res = __ww_mutex_add_waiter(waiter, rtm, ww_ctx, wake_q);
- wake_up_q(wake_q);
- preempt_enable();
if (res) {
raw_spin_lock(&task->pi_lock);
rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
--
2.47.0.277.g8800431eea-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-13 21:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-11 23:25 [PATCH v13 0/7] Preparatory changes for Proxy Execution v13 John Stultz
2024-10-11 23:25 ` [PATCH v13 1/7] locking/mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock John Stultz
2024-11-13 18:17 ` Arnd Bergmann
2024-11-13 19:07 ` John Stultz
2024-11-13 21:52 ` John Stultz [this message]
2024-11-13 22:49 ` [RFC][PATCH] locking: rtmutex: Fix wake_q logic in task_blocks_on_rt_mutex Anders Roxell
2024-11-14 6:37 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-11-14 18:40 ` John Stultz
2024-10-11 23:25 ` [PATCH v13 2/7] locking/mutex: Make mutex::wait_lock irq safe John Stultz
2024-10-11 23:25 ` [PATCH v13 3/7] locking/mutex: Expose __mutex_owner() John Stultz
2024-10-11 23:25 ` [PATCH v13 4/7] sched: Add move_queued_task_locked helper John Stultz
2024-10-11 23:25 ` [PATCH v13 5/7] sched: Consolidate pick_*_task to task_is_pushable helper John Stultz
2024-10-11 23:25 ` [PATCH v13 6/7] sched: Split out __schedule() deactivate task logic into a helper John Stultz
2024-10-11 23:25 ` [PATCH v13 7/7] sched: Split scheduler and execution contexts 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=20241113215252.3977066-1-jstultz@google.com \
--to=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=Metin.Kaya@arm.com \
--cc=anders.roxell@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@leemhuis.info \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qyousef@layalina.io \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=xuewen.yan94@gmail.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