[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tkrat.3cc18a24024636f5@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:54:24 +0100 (CET)
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys@...p.net.lb>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Subject: [PATCH] lockdep: annotate epoll
On 22 Jan, Stefan Richter wrote:
> On 22 Jan, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> Curious though that this gets reported frequently the last few weeks,
>> afaics this problem is way old.
>
> Here is a report against Fedora's 2.6.23-0.222.rc9.git4.fc8, filed in
> October: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=323411
Upstream bug: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9786
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:44:26 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 13:35 -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> I remember I talked with Arjan about this time ago. Basically, since 1)
> you can drop an epoll fd inside another epoll fd 2) callback-based wakeups
> are used, you can see a wake_up() from inside another wake_up(), but they
> will never refer to the same lock instance.
> Think about:
>
> dfd = socket(...);
> efd1 = epoll_create();
> efd2 = epoll_create();
> epoll_ctl(efd1, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, dfd, ...);
> epoll_ctl(efd2, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, efd1, ...);
>
> When a packet arrives to the device underneath "dfd", the net code will
> issue a wake_up() on its poll wake list. Epoll (efd1) has installed a
> callback wakeup entry on that queue, and the wake_up() performed by the
> "dfd" net code will end up in ep_poll_callback(). At this point epoll
> (efd1) notices that it may have some event ready, so it needs to wake up
> the waiters on its poll wait list (efd2). So it calls ep_poll_safewake()
> that ends up in another wake_up(), after having checked about the
> recursion constraints. That are, no more than EP_MAX_POLLWAKE_NESTS, to
> avoid stack blasting. Never hit the same queue, to avoid loops like:
>
> epoll_ctl(efd2, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, efd1, ...);
> epoll_ctl(efd3, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, efd2, ...);
> epoll_ctl(efd4, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, efd3, ...);
> epoll_ctl(efd1, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, efd4, ...);
>
> The code "if (tncur->wq == wq || ..." prevents re-entering the same
> queue/lock.
Since the epoll code is very careful to not nest same instance locks
allow the recursion.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Tested-by: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
---
fs/eventpoll.c | 2 +-
include/linux/wait.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux/fs/eventpoll.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/fs/eventpoll.c
+++ linux/fs/eventpoll.c
@@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ static void ep_poll_safewake(struct poll
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&psw->lock, flags);
/* Do really wake up now */
- wake_up(wq);
+ wake_up_nested(wq, 1 + wake_nests);
/* Remove the current task from the list */
spin_lock_irqsave(&psw->lock, flags);
Index: linux/include/linux/wait.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/linux/wait.h
+++ linux/include/linux/wait.h
@@ -161,6 +161,22 @@ wait_queue_head_t *FASTCALL(bit_waitqueu
#define wake_up_locked(x) __wake_up_locked((x), TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
#define wake_up_interruptible_sync(x) __wake_up_sync((x),TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 1)
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
+/*
+ * macro to avoid include hell
+ */
+#define wake_up_nested(x, s) \
+do { \
+ unsigned long flags; \
+ \
+ spin_lock_irqsave_nested(&(x)->lock, flags, (s)); \
+ wake_up_locked(x); \
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&(x)->lock, flags); \
+} while (0)
+#else
+#define wake_up_nested(x, s) wake_up(x)
+#endif
+
#define __wait_event(wq, condition) \
do { \
DEFINE_WAIT(__wait); \
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- ---= =-==-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists