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. 23 2月, 2018 1 次提交
    • W
      x86/intel_rdt: Fix incorrect returned value when creating rdgroup... · 36e74d35
      由 Wang Hui 提交于 
      x86/intel_rdt: Fix incorrect returned value when creating rdgroup sub-directory in resctrl file system

If no monitoring feature is detected because all monitoring features are
disabled during boot time or there is no monitoring feature in hardware,
creating rdtgroup sub-directory by "mkdir" command reports error:

  mkdir: cannot create directory ‘/sys/fs/resctrl/p1’: No such file or directory

But the sub-directory actually is generated and content is correct:

  cpus  cpus_list  schemata  tasks

The error is because rdtgroup_mkdir_ctrl_mon() returns non zero value after
the sub-directory is created and the returned value is reported as an error
to user.

Clear the returned value to report to user that the sub-directory is
actually created successfully.
Signed-off-by: NWang Hui <john.wanghui@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: NZhang Yanfei <yanfei.zhang@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: NFenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Vikas <vikas.shivappa@intel.com>
Cc: Xiaochen Shen <xiaochen.shen@intel.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1519356363-133085-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      36e74d35
  3. 18 1月, 2018 1 次提交
  5. 21 10月, 2017 2 次提交
    • R
      x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl mount · 87943db7
      由 Reinette Chatre 提交于 
      Sai reported a warning during some MBA tests:

[  236.755559] ======================================================
[  236.762443] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[  236.769328] 4.14.0-rc4-yocto-standard #8 Not tainted
[  236.774857] ------------------------------------------------------
[  236.781738] mount/10091 is trying to acquire lock:
[  236.787071]  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffff8117f892>] static_key_enable+0x12/0x30
[  236.797058]
               but task is already holding lock:
[  236.803552]  (&type->s_umount_key#37/1){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81208b2f>] sget_userns+0x32f/0x520
[  236.813247]
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[  236.822353]
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[  236.830686]
               -> #4 (&type->s_umount_key#37/1){+.+.}:
[  236.837756]        __lock_acquire+0x1100/0x11a0
[  236.842799]        lock_acquire+0xdf/0x1d0
[  236.847363]        down_write_nested+0x46/0x80
[  236.852310]        sget_userns+0x32f/0x520
[  236.856873]        kernfs_mount_ns+0x7e/0x1f0
[  236.861728]        rdt_mount+0x30c/0x440
[  236.866096]        mount_fs+0x38/0x150
[  236.870262]        vfs_kern_mount+0x67/0x150
[  236.875015]        do_mount+0x1df/0xd50
[  236.879286]        SyS_mount+0x95/0xe0
[  236.883464]        entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xad
[  236.889183]
               -> #3 (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}:
[  236.895292]        __lock_acquire+0x1100/0x11a0
[  236.900337]        lock_acquire+0xdf/0x1d0
[  236.904899]        __mutex_lock+0x80/0x8f0
[  236.909459]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[  236.914407]        intel_rdt_online_cpu+0x3b/0x4a0
[  236.919745]        cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xce/0xb80
[  236.925177]        cpuhp_thread_fun+0x1c5/0x230
[  236.930222]        smpboot_thread_fn+0x11a/0x1e0
[  236.935362]        kthread+0x152/0x190
[  236.939536]        ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
[  236.944097]
               -> #2 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}:
[  236.950199]        __lock_acquire+0x1100/0x11a0
[  236.955241]        lock_acquire+0xdf/0x1d0
[  236.959800]        cpuhp_issue_call+0x12e/0x1c0
[  236.964845]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x13b/0x2f0
[  236.971242]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xa7/0x120
[  236.976483]        page_writeback_init+0x43/0x67
[  236.981623]        pagecache_init+0x38/0x3b
[  236.986281]        start_kernel+0x3c6/0x41a
[  236.990931]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[  236.996650]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[  237.001793]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[  237.005966]
               -> #1 (cpuhp_state_mutex){+.+.}:
[  237.012364]        __lock_acquire+0x1100/0x11a0
[  237.017408]        lock_acquire+0xdf/0x1d0
[  237.021969]        __mutex_lock+0x80/0x8f0
[  237.026527]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[  237.031475]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x54/0x2f0
[  237.037777]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xa7/0x120
[  237.043013]        page_alloc_init+0x28/0x30
[  237.047769]        start_kernel+0x148/0x41a
[  237.052425]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[  237.058145]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[  237.063284]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[  237.067456]
               -> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
[  237.074436]        check_prev_add+0x401/0x800
[  237.079286]        __lock_acquire+0x1100/0x11a0
[  237.084330]        lock_acquire+0xdf/0x1d0
[  237.088890]        cpus_read_lock+0x42/0x90
[  237.093548]        static_key_enable+0x12/0x30
[  237.098496]        rdt_mount+0x406/0x440
[  237.102862]        mount_fs+0x38/0x150
[  237.107035]        vfs_kern_mount+0x67/0x150
[  237.111787]        do_mount+0x1df/0xd50
[  237.116058]        SyS_mount+0x95/0xe0
[  237.120233]        entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xad
[  237.125952]
               other info that might help us debug this:

[  237.134867] Chain exists of:
                 cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem --> rdtgroup_mutex --> &type->s_umount_key#37/1

[  237.148425]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[  237.155015]        CPU0                    CPU1
[  237.160057]        ----                    ----
[  237.165100]   lock(&type->s_umount_key#37/1);
[  237.169952]                                lock(rdtgroup_mutex);
[  237.176641]
lock(&type->s_umount_key#37/1);
[  237.184287]   lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
[  237.189041]
                *** DEADLOCK ***

When the resctrl filesystem is mounted the locks must be acquired 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_enable() calls to the
_cpulocked variant because now cpu hotplug lock is held already.

[ tglx: Switched to cpus_read_[un]lock ]
Reported-by: NSai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NReinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Tested-by: NSai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>
Acked-by: NVikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>
Cc: fenghua.yu@intel.com
Cc: tony.luck@intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c41b91bc2f47d9e95b62b213ecdb45623c47a9f.1508490116.git.reinette.chatre@intel.comSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      87943db7
    • 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
  7. 05 10月, 2017 1 次提交
  9. 27 9月, 2017 4 次提交
  11. 16 8月, 2017 2 次提交
  13. 14 8月, 2017 1 次提交
  15. 02 8月, 2017 19 次提交
  17. 01 7月, 2017 1 次提交
  19. 14 4月, 2017 4 次提交
  21. 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
  23. 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
  25. 02 3月, 2017 2 次提交