Re: Crash with PREEMPT_RT on aarch64 machine

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>]

+ locking, arm64

On 2022-11-07 14:56:36 [+0100], Jan Kara wrote:
> > spinlock_t and raw_spinlock_t differ slightly in terms of locking.
> > rt_spin_lock() has the fast path via try_cmpxchg_acquire(). If you
> > enable CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES then you would force the slow path which
> > always acquires the rt_mutex_base::wait_lock (which is a raw_spinlock_t)
> > while the actual lock is modified via cmpxchg. 
> 
> So I've tried enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES and indeed the corruption
> stops happening as well. So do you suspect some bug in the CPU itself?

If it is only enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES (and not whole lockdep)
then it looks very suspicious. 
CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES enables a few additional checks but the main
part is that rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire() + rt_mutex_cmpxchg_release()
always fail (and so the slowpath under a raw_spinlock_t is done).

So if it is really the fast path (rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire()) then it
somehow smells like the CPU is misbehaving.

Could someone from the locking/arm64 department check if the locking in
RT-mutex (rtlock_lock()) is correct?

rtmutex locking uses try_cmpxchg_acquire(, ptr, ptr) for the fastpath
(and try_cmpxchg_release(, ptr, ptr) for unlock).
Now looking at it again, I don't see much difference compared to what
queued_spin_trylock() does except the latter always operates on 32bit
value instead a pointer.

> 								Honza
> 

Sebastian