Skip to content

R
raspberrypi-kernel

openeuler / raspberrypi-kernel

通知 13
Star 1
Fork 0
R
raspberrypi-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 21 10月, 2017 1 次提交
    • R
      x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount · 36b6f9fc
      由 Reinette Chatre 提交于 
      Lockdep warns about a potential deadlock:

[   66.782842] ======================================================
[   66.782888] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[   66.782937] 4.14.0-rc2-test-test+ #48 Not tainted
[   66.782983] ------------------------------------------------------
[   66.783052] umount/336 is trying to acquire lock:
[   66.783117]  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffff81032395>] rdt_kill_sb+0x215/0x390
[   66.783193]
               but task is already holding lock:
[   66.783244]  (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810321b6>] rdt_kill_sb+0x36/0x390
[   66.783305]
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[   66.783364]
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[   66.783419]
               -> #3 (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}:
[   66.783467]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.783509]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.783543]        __mutex_lock+0x71/0x9b0
[   66.783575]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[   66.783610]        intel_rdt_online_cpu+0x3b/0x430
[   66.783649]        cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xab/0x8e0
[   66.783687]        cpuhp_thread_fun+0x7a/0x150
[   66.783722]        smpboot_thread_fn+0x1cc/0x270
[   66.783764]        kthread+0x16e/0x190
[   66.783794]        ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
[   66.783825]
               -> #2 (cpuhp_state){+.+.}:
[   66.783870]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.783906]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.783938]        cpuhp_issue_call+0x102/0x170
[   66.783974]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x154/0x2a0
[   66.784023]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xc7/0x170
[   66.784061]        page_writeback_init+0x43/0x67
[   66.784097]        pagecache_init+0x43/0x4a
[   66.784131]        start_kernel+0x3ad/0x3f7
[   66.784165]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[   66.784204]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[   66.784241]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[   66.784270]
               -> #1 (cpuhp_state_mutex){+.+.}:
[   66.784319]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.784355]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.784387]        __mutex_lock+0x71/0x9b0
[   66.784419]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[   66.784454]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x52/0x2a0
[   66.784497]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xc7/0x170
[   66.784535]        page_alloc_init+0x28/0x30
[   66.784569]        start_kernel+0x148/0x3f7
[   66.784602]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[   66.784642]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[   66.784678]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[   66.784707]
               -> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
[   66.784759]        check_prev_add+0x32f/0x6e0
[   66.784794]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.784830]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.784863]        cpus_read_lock+0x3d/0xb0
[   66.784896]        rdt_kill_sb+0x215/0x390
[   66.784930]        deactivate_locked_super+0x3e/0x70
[   66.784968]        deactivate_super+0x40/0x60
[   66.785003]        cleanup_mnt+0x3f/0x80
[   66.785034]        __cleanup_mnt+0x12/0x20
[   66.785070]        task_work_run+0x8b/0xc0
[   66.785103]        exit_to_usermode_loop+0x94/0xa0
[   66.786804]        syscall_return_slowpath+0xe8/0x150
[   66.788502]        entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0xab/0xad
[   66.790194]
               other info that might help us debug this:

[   66.795139] Chain exists of:
                 cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem --> cpuhp_state --> rdtgroup_mutex

[   66.800035]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[   66.803267]        CPU0                    CPU1
[   66.804867]        ----                    ----
[   66.806443]   lock(rdtgroup_mutex);
[   66.808002]                                lock(cpuhp_state);
[   66.809565]                                lock(rdtgroup_mutex);
[   66.811110]   lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
[   66.812608]
                *** DEADLOCK ***

[   66.816983] 2 locks held by umount/336:
[   66.818418]  #0:  (&type->s_umount_key#35){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81229738>] deactivate_super+0x38/0x60
[   66.819922]  #1:  (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810321b6>] rdt_kill_sb+0x36/0x390

When the resctrl filesystem is unmounted the locks should be obtain in the
locks in the same order as was done when the cpus came online:

      cpu_hotplug_lock before rdtgroup_mutex.

This also requires to switch the static_branch_disable() calls to the
_cpulocked variant because now cpu hotplug lock is held already.

[ tglx: Switched to cpus_read_[un]lock ]
Signed-off-by: NReinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: NSai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>
Acked-by: NVikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: NFenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Acked-by: NTony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/cc292e76be073f7260604651711c47b09fd0dc81.1508490116.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com
      36b6f9fc
  3. 05 10月, 2017 1 次提交
  5. 27 9月, 2017 4 次提交
  7. 16 8月, 2017 2 次提交
  9. 14 8月, 2017 1 次提交
  11. 02 8月, 2017 19 次提交
  13. 01 7月, 2017 1 次提交
  15. 14 4月, 2017 4 次提交
  17. 11 4月, 2017 1 次提交
    • J
      x86/intel_rdt: Add cpus_list rdtgroup file · 4ffa3c97
      由 Jiri Olsa 提交于 
      The resource control filesystem provides only a bitmask based cpus file for
assigning CPUs to a resource group. That's cumbersome with large cpumasks
and non-intuitive when modifying the file from the command line.

Range based cpu lists are commonly used along with bitmask based cpu files
in various subsystems throughout the kernel.

Add 'cpus_list' file which is CPU range based.

  # cd /sys/fs/resctrl/
  # echo 1-10 > krava/cpus_list
  # cat krava/cpus_list
  1-10
  # cat krava/cpus
  0007fe
  # cat cpus
  fffff9
  # cat cpus_list
  0,3-23

[ tglx: Massaged changelog and replaced "bitmask lists" by "CPU ranges" ]
Signed-off-by: NJiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170410145232.GF25354@kravaSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      4ffa3c97
  19. 15 3月, 2017 1 次提交
    • J
      x86/intel_rdt: Put group node in rdtgroup_kn_unlock · 49ec8f5b
      由 Jiri Olsa 提交于 
      The rdtgroup_kn_unlock waits for the last user to release and put its
node. But it's calling kernfs_put on the node which calls the
rdtgroup_kn_unlock, which might not be the group's directory node, but
another group's file node.

This race could be easily reproduced by running 2 instances
of following script:

  mount -t resctrl resctrl /sys/fs/resctrl/
  pushd /sys/fs/resctrl/
  mkdir krava
  echo "krava" > krava/schemata
  rmdir krava
  popd
  umount  /sys/fs/resctrl

It triggers the slub debug error message with following command
line config: slub_debug=,kernfs_node_cache.

Call kernfs_put on the group's node to fix it.

Fixes: 60cf5e10 ("x86/intel_rdt: Add mkdir to resctrl file system")
Signed-off-by: NJiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1489501253-20248-1-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      49ec8f5b
  21. 02 3月, 2017 2 次提交
  23. 01 3月, 2017 1 次提交
  25. 09 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  27. 02 12月, 2016 1 次提交