From: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kcc@google.com, glider@google.com,
sasha.levin@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: fix stack trace caching logic
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 09:44:38 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56B38E06.3040607@hurleysoftware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1454593240-121647-1-git-send-email-dvyukov@google.com>
On 02/04/2016 05:40 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> check_prev_add() caches saved stack trace in static trace variable
> to avoid duplicate save_trace() calls in dependencies involving trylocks.
> But that caching logic contains a bug.
> We may not save trace on first iteration due to early return from check_prev_add().
This commit log should identify the role test instrumentation plays in triggering
this bug: is it a recursive read lock dependency injected between existing lock
dependencies? What test component triggered this?
> Then on the second iteration when we actually need the trace we don't save it
> because we think that we've already saved it.
>
> Let check_prev_add() itself control when stack is saved.
>
> There is another bug. Trace variable is protected by graph lock.
> But we can temporary release graph lock during printing.
>
> Fix this by invalidating cached stack trace when we release graph lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
> ---
> kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index 60ace56..c7710e4 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -1822,7 +1822,7 @@ check_deadlock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next,
> */
> static int
> check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> - struct held_lock *next, int distance, int trylock_loop)
> + struct held_lock *next, int distance, int *stack_saved)
> {
> struct lock_list *entry;
> int ret;
> @@ -1883,8 +1883,11 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> }
> }
>
> - if (!trylock_loop && !save_trace(&trace))
> - return 0;
> + if (!*stack_saved) {
> + if (!save_trace(&trace))
> + return 0;
> + *stack_saved = 1;
> + }
>
> /*
> * Ok, all validations passed, add the new lock
> @@ -1907,6 +1910,8 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> * Debugging printouts:
> */
> if (verbose(hlock_class(prev)) || verbose(hlock_class(next))) {
> + /* We drop graph lock, so another thread can overwrite trace. */
> + *stack_saved = 0;
> graph_unlock();
> printk("\n new dependency: ");
> print_lock_name(hlock_class(prev));
> @@ -1929,7 +1934,7 @@ static int
> check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
> {
> int depth = curr->lockdep_depth;
> - int trylock_loop = 0;
> + int stack_saved = 0;
> struct held_lock *hlock;
>
> /*
> @@ -1956,7 +1961,7 @@ check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
> */
> if (hlock->read != 2 && hlock->check) {
> if (!check_prev_add(curr, hlock, next,
> - distance, trylock_loop))
> + distance, &stack_saved))
> return 0;
> /*
> * Stop after the first non-trylock entry,
> @@ -1979,7 +1984,6 @@ check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
> if (curr->held_locks[depth].irq_context !=
> curr->held_locks[depth-1].irq_context)
> break;
> - trylock_loop = 1;
> }
> return 1;
> out_bug:
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-04 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-04 13:40 [PATCH] lockdep: fix stack trace caching logic Dmitry Vyukov
2016-02-04 17:44 ` Peter Hurley [this message]
2016-02-04 17:50 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2016-02-04 18:33 ` Peter Hurley
2016-02-09 12:19 ` [tip:locking/core] locking/lockdep: Fix " tip-bot for Dmitry Vyukov
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=56B38E06.3040607@hurleysoftware.com \
--to=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=kcc@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.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