We should deboost before waking the high-priority task, such that we
don't run two tasks with the same "state" (priority, deadline,
sched_class, etc).

In order to make sure the boosting task doesn't start running between
unlock and deboost (due to 'spurious' wakeup), we move the deboost
under the wait_lock, that way its serialized against the wait loop in
__rt_mutex_slowlock().

Doing the deboost early can however lead to priority-inversion if
current would get preempted after the deboost but before waking our
high-prio task, hence we disable preemption before doing deboost, and
enabling it after the wake up is over.

This gets us the right semantic order, but most importantly however;
this change ensures pointer stability for the next patch, where we
have rt_mutex_setprio() cache a pointer to the top-most waiter task.
If we, as before this change, do the wakeup first and then deboost,
this pointer might point into thin air.

[peterz: Changelog + patch munging]
Suggested-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: NXunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170323150216.110065320@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

When PREEMPT_RT_FULL does the spinlock -> rt_mutex substitution the PI
chain code will (falsely) report a deadlock and BUG.

The problem is that it hold hb->lock (now an rt_mutex) while doing
task_blocks_on_rt_mutex on the futex's pi_state::rtmutex. This, when
interleaved just right with futex_unlock_pi() leads it to believe to see an
AB-BA deadlock.

  Task1 (holds rt_mutex,	Task2 (does FUTEX_LOCK_PI)
         does FUTEX_UNLOCK_PI)

				lock hb->lock
				lock rt_mutex (as per start_proxy)
  lock hb->lock

Which is a trivial AB-BA.

It is not an actual deadlock, because it won't be holding hb->lock by the
time it actually blocks on the rt_mutex, but the chainwalk code doesn't
know that and it would be a nightmare to handle this gracefully.

To avoid this problem, do the same as in futex_unlock_pi() and drop
hb->lock after acquiring wait_lock. This still fully serializes against
futex_unlock_pi(), since adding to the wait_list does the very same lock
dance, and removing it holds both locks.

Aside of solving the RT problem this makes the lock and unlock mechanism
symetric and reduces the hb->lock held time.
Reported-and-tested-by: NSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Suggested-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: dvhart@infradead.org
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104152.161341537@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

By changing futex_lock_pi() to use rt_mutex_*_proxy_lock() all wait_list
modifications are done under both hb->lock and wait_lock.

This closes the obvious interleave pattern between futex_lock_pi() and
futex_unlock_pi(), but not entirely so. See below:

Before:

futex_lock_pi()			futex_unlock_pi()
  unlock hb->lock

				  lock hb->lock
				  unlock hb->lock

				  lock rt_mutex->wait_lock
				  unlock rt_mutex_wait_lock
				    -EAGAIN

  lock rt_mutex->wait_lock
  list_add
  unlock rt_mutex->wait_lock

  schedule()

  lock rt_mutex->wait_lock
  list_del
  unlock rt_mutex->wait_lock

				  <idem>
				    -EAGAIN

  lock hb->lock


After:

futex_lock_pi()			futex_unlock_pi()

  lock hb->lock
  lock rt_mutex->wait_lock
  list_add
  unlock rt_mutex->wait_lock
  unlock hb->lock

  schedule()
				  lock hb->lock
				  unlock hb->lock
  lock hb->lock
  lock rt_mutex->wait_lock
  list_del
  unlock rt_mutex->wait_lock

				  lock rt_mutex->wait_lock
				  unlock rt_mutex_wait_lock
				    -EAGAIN

  unlock hb->lock


It does however solve the earlier starvation/live-lock scenario which got
introduced with the -EAGAIN since unlike the before scenario; where the
-EAGAIN happens while futex_unlock_pi() doesn't hold any locks; in the
after scenario it happens while futex_unlock_pi() actually holds a lock,
and then it is serialized on that lock.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: dvhart@infradead.org
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104152.062785528@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

With the ultimate goal of keeping rt_mutex wait_list and futex_q waiters
consistent it's necessary to split 'rt_mutex_futex_lock()' into finer
parts, such that only the actual blocking can be done without hb->lock
held.

Split split_mutex_finish_proxy_lock() into two parts, one that does the
blocking and one that does remove_waiter() when the lock acquire failed.

When the rtmutex was acquired successfully the waiter can be removed in the
acquisiton path safely, since there is no concurrency on the lock owner.

This means that, except for futex_lock_pi(), all wait_list modifications
are done with both hb->lock and wait_lock held.

[bigeasy@linutronix.de: fix for futex_requeue_pi_signal_restart]
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: dvhart@infradead.org
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104152.001659630@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

Since there's already two copies of this code, introduce a helper now
before adding a third one.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: dvhart@infradead.org
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104151.950039479@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

Part of what makes futex_unlock_pi() intricate is that
rt_mutex_futex_unlock() -> rt_mutex_slowunlock() can drop
rt_mutex::wait_lock.

This means it cannot rely on the atomicy of wait_lock, which would be
preferred in order to not rely on hb->lock so much.

The reason rt_mutex_slowunlock() needs to drop wait_lock is because it can
race with the rt_mutex fastpath, however futexes have their own fast path.

Since futexes already have a bunch of separate rt_mutex accessors, complete
that set and implement a rt_mutex variant without fastpath for them.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: dvhart@infradead.org
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104151.702962446@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

These are unused and clutter up the code.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: dvhart@infradead.org
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104151.652692478@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

We are going to split <linux/sched/debug.h> out of <linux/sched.h>, which
will have to be picked up from other headers and a couple of .c files.

Create a trivial placeholder <linux/sched/debug.h> file that just
maps to <linux/sched.h> to make this patch obviously correct and
bisectable.

Include the new header in the files that are going to need it.
Acked-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

sched/headers: Prepare to move signal wakeup & sigpending methods from <linux/sched.h> into <linux/sched/signal.h>

Fix up affected files that include this signal functionality via sched.h.
Acked-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

We are going to split <linux/sched/wake_q.h> out of <linux/sched.h>, which
will have to be picked up from other headers and a couple of .c files.

Create a trivial placeholder <linux/sched/wake_q.h> file that just
maps to <linux/sched.h> to make this patch obviously correct and
bisectable.

Include the new header in the files that are going to need it.
Acked-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

Running my likely/unlikely profiler for 3 weeks on two production
machines, I discovered that the unlikely() test in
__rt_mutex_slowlock() checking if state is TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE is hit
100% of the time, making it a very likely case.

The reason is, on a vanilla kernel, the majority case of calling
rt_mutex() is from the futex code. This code is always called as
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE. In the -rt patch, this code is commonly called when
PREEMPT_RT is enabled with TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE. But that's not the
likely scenario.

The rt_mutex() code should be optimized for the common vanilla case,
and that is from a futex, with TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE as the state.
Signed-off-by: NSteven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170119113234.1efeedd1@gandalf.local.homeSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

While debugging the unlock vs. dequeue race which resulted in state
corruption of futexes the lockless nature of rt_mutex_proxy_unlock()
caused some confusion.

Add commentry to explain why it is safe to do this lockless. Add matching
comments to rt_mutex_init_proxy_locked() for completeness sake.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161130210030.591941927@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

David reported a futex/rtmutex state corruption. It's caused by the
following problem:

CPU0		CPU1		CPU2

l->owner=T1
		rt_mutex_lock(l)
		lock(l->wait_lock)
		l->owner = T1 | HAS_WAITERS;
		enqueue(T2)
		boost()
		  unlock(l->wait_lock)
		schedule()

				rt_mutex_lock(l)
				lock(l->wait_lock)
				l->owner = T1 | HAS_WAITERS;
				enqueue(T3)
				boost()
				  unlock(l->wait_lock)
				schedule()
		signal(->T2)	signal(->T3)
		lock(l->wait_lock)
		dequeue(T2)
		deboost()
		  unlock(l->wait_lock)
				lock(l->wait_lock)
				dequeue(T3)
				  ===> wait list is now empty
				deboost()
				 unlock(l->wait_lock)
		lock(l->wait_lock)
		fixup_rt_mutex_waiters()
		  if (wait_list_empty(l)) {
		    owner = l->owner & ~HAS_WAITERS;
		    l->owner = owner
		     ==> l->owner = T1
		  }

				lock(l->wait_lock)
rt_mutex_unlock(l)		fixup_rt_mutex_waiters()
				  if (wait_list_empty(l)) {
				    owner = l->owner & ~HAS_WAITERS;
cmpxchg(l->owner, T1, NULL)
 ===> Success (l->owner = NULL)
				    l->owner = owner
				     ==> l->owner = T1
				  }

That means the problem is caused by fixup_rt_mutex_waiters() which does the
RMW to clear the waiters bit unconditionally when there are no waiters in
the rtmutexes rbtree.

This can be fatal: A concurrent unlock can release the rtmutex in the
fastpath because the waiters bit is not set. If the cmpxchg() gets in the
middle of the RMW operation then the previous owner, which just unlocked
the rtmutex is set as the owner again when the write takes place after the
successfull cmpxchg().

The solution is rather trivial: verify that the owner member of the rtmutex
has the waiters bit set before clearing it. This does not require a
cmpxchg() or other atomic operations because the waiters bit can only be
set and cleared with the rtmutex wait_lock held. It's also safe against the
fast path unlock attempt. The unlock attempt via cmpxchg() will either see
the bit set and take the slowpath or see the bit cleared and release it
atomically in the fastpath.

It's remarkable that the test program provided by David triggers on ARM64
and MIPS64 really quick, but it refuses to reproduce on x86-64, while the
problem exists there as well. That refusal might explain that this got not
discovered earlier despite the bug existing from day one of the rtmutex
implementation more than 10 years ago.

Thanks to David for meticulously instrumenting the code and providing the
information which allowed to decode this subtle problem.
Reported-by: NDavid Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
Tested-by: NDavid Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 23f78d4a ("[PATCH] pi-futex: rt mutex core")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161130210030.351136722@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

Currently the wake_q data structure is defined by the WAKE_Q() macro.
This macro, however, looks like a function doing something as "wake" is
a verb. Even checkpatch.pl was confused as it reported warnings like

  WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
  #548: FILE: kernel/futex.c:3665:
  +	int ret;
  +	WAKE_Q(wake_q);

This patch renames the WAKE_Q() macro to DEFINE_WAKE_Q() which clarifies
what the macro is doing and eliminates the checkpatch.pl warnings.
Signed-off-by: NWaiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Acked-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1479401198-1765-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com
[ Resolved conflict and added missing rename. ]
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

One warning should be enough to get one motivated to fix this. It is
possible that this happens more than once and that starts flooding the
output. Later the prints will be suppressed so we only get half of it.
Depending on the console system used it might not be helpful.
Signed-off-by: NSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1464356838-1755-1-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

Sasha reported a lockdep splat about a potential deadlock between RCU boosting
rtmutex and the posix timer it_lock.

CPU0					CPU1

rtmutex_lock(&rcu->rt_mutex)
  spin_lock(&rcu->rt_mutex.wait_lock)
					local_irq_disable()
					spin_lock(&timer->it_lock)
					spin_lock(&rcu->mutex.wait_lock)
--> Interrupt
    spin_lock(&timer->it_lock)

This is caused by the following code sequence on CPU1

     rcu_read_lock()
     x = lookup();
     if (x)
     	spin_lock_irqsave(&x->it_lock);
     rcu_read_unlock();
     return x;

We could fix that in the posix timer code by keeping rcu read locked across
the spinlocked and irq disabled section, but the above sequence is common and
there is no reason not to support it.

Taking rt_mutex.wait_lock irq safe prevents the deadlock.
Reported-by: NSasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

As of 654672d4 (locking/atomics: Add _{acquire|release|relaxed}()
variants of some atomic operations) and 6d79ef2d (locking, asm-generic:
Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for 'atomic_long_t'), weakly
ordered archs can benefit from more relaxed use of barriers when locking
and unlocking, instead of regular full barrier semantics. While currently
only arm64 supports such optimizations, updating corresponding locking
primitives serves for other archs to immediately benefit as well, once the
necessary machinery is implemented of course.
Signed-off-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul E.McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1443643395-17016-4-git-send-email-dave@stgolabs.netSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

rt_mutex_waiter_less() check of task deadlines is open coded. Since this
is subject to wraparound bugs, make it use the correct helper.
Reported-by: NLuca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
Signed-off-by: NJuri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1441188096-23021-4-git-send-email-juri.lelli@arm.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

No one uses this anymore, and this is not the first time the
idea of replacing it with a (now possible) userspace side.
Lock stealing logic was removed long ago in when the lock
was granted to the highest prio.
Signed-off-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1435782588-4177-2-git-send-email-dave@stgolabs.netSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

... as of fb00aca4 (rtmutex: Turn the plist into an rb-tree) we
no longer use plists for queuing any waiters. Update stale comments.
Signed-off-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1432056298-18738-4-git-send-email-dave@stgolabs.netSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

wake_futex_pi() wakes the task before releasing the hash bucket lock
(HB). The first thing the woken up task usually does is to acquire the
lock which requires the HB lock. On SMP Systems this leads to blocking
on the HB lock which is released by the owner shortly after.
This patch rearranges the unlock path by first releasing the HB lock and
then waking up the task.

[ tglx: Fixed up the rtmutex unlock path ]

Originally-from: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150617083350.GA2433@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

Mark the task for later wakeup after the wait_lock has been released.
This way, once the next task is awoken, it will have a better chance
to of finding the wait_lock free when continuing executing in
__rt_mutex_slowlock() when trying to acquire the rtmutex, calling
try_to_take_rt_mutex(). Upon contended scenarios, other tasks attempting
take the lock may acquire it first, right after the wait_lock is released,
but (a) this can also occur with the current code, as it relies on the
spinlock fairness, and (b) we are dealing with the top-waiter anyway,
so it will always take the lock next.
Signed-off-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1432056298-18738-2-git-send-email-dave@stgolabs.netSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

rt_mutex_trylock() must be called from thread context. It can be
called from atomic regions (preemption or interrupts disabled), but
not from hard/softirq/nmi context. Add a warning to alert abusers.

The reasons for this are:

    1) There is a potential deadlock in the slowpath

    2) Another cpu which blocks on the rtmutex will boost the task
       which allegedly locked the rtmutex, but that cannot work
       because the hard/softirq context borrows the task context.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>

The rtmutex code is the only user of __HAVE_ARCH_CMPXCHG and we have a few
other user of cmpxchg() which do not care about __HAVE_ARCH_CMPXCHG. This
define was first introduced in 23f78d4a ("[PATCH] pi-futex: rt mutex core")
which is v2.6.18. The generic cmpxchg was introduced later in 068fbad2
("Add cmpxchg_local to asm-generic for per cpu atomic operations") which is
v2.6.25.
Back then something was required to get rtmutex working with the fast
path on architectures without cmpxchg and this seems to be the result.

It popped up recently on rt-users because ARM (v6+) does not define
__HAVE_ARCH_CMPXCHG (even that it implements it) which results in slower
locking performance in the fast path.
To put some numbers on it: preempt -RT, am335x, 10 loops of
100000 invocations of rt_spin_lock() + rt_spin_unlock() (time "total" is
the average of the 10 loops for the 100000 invocations, "loop" is
"total / 100000 * 1000"):

     cmpxchg |    slowpath used  ||    cmpxchg used
             |   total   | loop  ||   total    | loop
     --------|-----------|-------||------------|-------
     ARMv6   | 9129.4 us | 91 ns ||  3311.9 us |  33 ns
     generic | 9360.2 us | 94 ns || 10834.6 us | 108 ns
     ----------------------------||--------------------

Forcing it to generic cmpxchg() made things worse for the slowpath and
even worse in cmpxchg() path. It boils down to 14ns more per lock+unlock
in a cache hot loop so it might not be that much in real world.
The last test was a substitute for pre ARMv6 machine but then I was able
to perform the comparison on imx28 which is ARMv5 and therefore is
always is using the generic cmpxchg implementation. And the numbers:

              |   total     | loop
     -------- |-----------  |--------
     slowpath | 263937.2 us | 2639 ns
     cmpxchg  |  16934.2 us |  169 ns
     --------------------------------

The numbers are larger since the machine is slower in general. However,
letting rtmutex use cmpxchg() instead the slowpath seem to improve things.

Since from the ARM (tested on am335x + imx28) point of view always
using cmpxchg() in rt_mutex_lock() + rt_mutex_unlock() makes sense I
would drop the define.
Signed-off-by: NSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: will.deacon@arm.com
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150225175613.GE6823@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

Ronny reported that the following scenario is not handled correctly:

	T1 (prio = 10)
	   lock(rtmutex);

	T2 (prio = 20)
	   lock(rtmutex)
	      boost T1

	T1 (prio = 20)
	   sys_set_scheduler(prio = 30)
	   T1 prio = 30
	   ....
	   sys_set_scheduler(prio = 10)
	   T1 prio = 30

The last step is wrong as T1 should now be back at prio 20.

Commit c365c292 ("sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()")
only handles the case where a boosted tasks tries to lower its
priority.

Fix it by taking the new effective priority into account for the
decision whether a change of the priority is required.
Reported-by: NRonny Meeus <ronny.meeus@gmail.com>
Tested-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Fixes: c365c292 ("sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.DEB.2.11.1505051806060.4225@nanosSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

The check for hrtimer_active() after starting the timer is
pointless. If the timer is inactive it has expired already and
therefor the task pointer is already NULL.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150414203503.081830481@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

The following commit changed "deadlock_detect" to "chwalk":

   8930ed80 ("rtmutex: Cleanup deadlock detector debug logic")

do that rename in the function's documentation as well.
Signed-off-by: NTom(JeHyeon) Yeon <tom.yeon@windriver.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1426655010-31651-1-git-send-email-tom.yeon@windriver.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

The "usual" path is:

 - rt_mutex_slowlock()
 - set_current_state()
 - task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() (ret 0)
 - __rt_mutex_slowlock()
   - sleep or not but do return with __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING)
 - back to caller.

In the early error case where task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() return
-EDEADLK we never change the task's state back to RUNNING. I
assume this is intended. Without this change after ww_mutex
using rt_mutex the selftest passes but later I get plenty of:

  | bad: scheduling from the idle thread!

backtraces.
Signed-off-by: NSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: NMike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Fixes: afffc6c1 ("locking/rtmutex: Optimize setting task running after being blocked")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1425056229-22326-4-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

With task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() returning early -EDEADLK we never
add the waiter to the waitqueue. Later, we try to remove it via
remove_waiter() and go boom in rt_mutex_top_waiter() because
rb_entry() gives a NULL pointer.

( Tested on v3.18-RT where rtmutex is used for regular mutex and I
  tried to get one twice in a row. )

Not sure when this started but I guess 397335f0 ("rtmutex: Fix
deadlock detector for real") or commit 3d5c9340 ("rtmutex:
Handle deadlock detection smarter").
Signed-off-by: NSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # for v3.16 and later kernels
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1424187823-19600-1-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

We explicitly mark the task running after returning from
a __rt_mutex_slowlock() call, which does the actual sleeping
via wait-wake-trylocking. As such, this patch does two things:

(1) refactors the code so that setting current to TASK_RUNNING
    is done by __rt_mutex_slowlock(), and not by the callers. The
    downside to this is that it becomes a bit unclear when at what
    point we block. As such I've added a comment that the task
    blocks when calling __rt_mutex_slowlock() so readers can figure
    out when it is running again.

(2) relaxes setting current's state through __set_current_state(),
    instead of it's more expensive barrier alternative. There was no
    need for the implied barrier as we're obviously not planning on
    blocking.
Signed-off-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1422857784.18096.1.camel@stgolabs.netSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

Specifically:
  Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.txt
  Documentation/locking/lockstat.txt
  Documentation/locking/mutex-design.txt
  Documentation/locking/rt-mutex-design.txt
  Documentation/locking/rt-mutex.txt
  Documentation/locking/spinlocks.txt
  Documentation/locking/ww-mutex-design.txt
Signed-off-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
Acked-by: NRandy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: jason.low2@hp.com
Cc: aswin@hp.com
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@v3.sk>
Cc: Masanari Iida <standby24x7@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>
Cc: fengguang.wu@intel.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1406752916-3341-6-git-send-email-davidlohr@hp.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

In case the dead lock detector is enabled we follow the lock chain to
the end in rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain, even if we could stop earlier
due to the priority/waiter constellation.

But once we are no longer the top priority waiter in a certain step
or the task holding the lock has already the same priority then there
is no point in dequeing and enqueing along the lock chain as there is
no change at all.

So stop the queueing at this point.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140522031950.280830190@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

The conditions under which deadlock detection is conducted are unclear
and undocumented.

Add constants instead of using 0/1 and provide a selection function
which hides the additional debug dependency from the calling code.

Add comments where needed.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140522031949.947264874@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

The deadlock logic is only required for futexes.

Remove the extra arguments for the public functions and also for the
futex specific ones which get always called with deadlock detection
enabled.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>

Exit right away, when the removed waiter was not the top priority
waiter on the lock. Get rid of the extra indent level.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Reviewed-by: NLai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>

Add commentry to document the chain walk and the protection mechanisms
and their scope.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>

Add a separate local variable for the boost/deboost logic to make the
code more readable. Add comments where appropriate.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>

There is no point to keep the task ref across the check for lock
owner. Drop the ref before that, so the protection context is clear.

Found while documenting the chain walk.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Reviewed-by: NLai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>

The current implementation of try_to_take_rtmutex() is correct, but
requires more than a single brain twist to understand the clever
encoded conditionals.

Untangle it and document the cases proper.

Looks less efficient at the first glance, but actually reduces the
binary code size on x8664 by 80 bytes.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>

Oleg noticed that rtmutex_slowtrylock() has a pointless check for
rt_mutex_owner(lock) != current.

To avoid calling try_to_take_rtmutex() we really want to check whether
the lock has an owner at all or whether the trylock failed because the
owner is NULL, but the RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS bit is set. This covers
the lock is owned by caller situation as well.

We can actually do this check lockless. trylock is taking a chance
whether we take lock->wait_lock to do the check or not.

Add comments to the function while at it.
Reported-by: NOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Reviewed-by: NLai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>