linux-kernel - Re: Incorrect circular locking dependency?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:51:26 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux filesystem caching discussion list 
	<linux-cachefs@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	oleg <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Incorrect circular locking dependency?

On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 15:37 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
> 
> > =======================================================
> > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> > 2.6.30-test #7
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock:
> >  (&cwq->lock){-.-...}, at: [<c01519f3>] __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e
> > 
> > but task is already holding lock:
> >  (&q->lock){-.-.-.}, at: [<c012cc9c>] __wake_up+0x26/0x5c
> > 
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> 
> Okay.  I think I understand this:
> 
>  (1) cachefiles_read_waiter() intercepts wake up events, and, as such, is run
>      inside the waitqueue spinlock for the page bit waitqueue.
> 
>  (2) cachefiles_read_waiter() calls fscache_enqueue_retrieval() which calls
>      fscache_enqueue_operation() which calls schedule_work() for fast
>      operations, thus taking a per-CPU workqueue spinlock.
> 
>  (3) queue_work(), which is called by many things, calls __queue_work(), which
>      takes the per-CPU workqueue spinlock.
> 
>  (4) __queue_work() then calls insert_work(), which calls wake_up(), which
>      takes the waitqueue spinlock for the per-CPU workqueue waitqueue.
> 
> Even though the two waitqueues are separate, I think lockdep sees them as
> having the same lock.

Yeah, it looks like cwq->lock is always in the same lock class.

Creating a new class for your second workqueue might help, we'd have to
pass a second key through __create_workqueue_key() and pass that into
init_cpu_workqueue() and apply it to cwq->lock using lockdep_set_class()
and co.

~ Peter

> ---
> > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > 
> > -> #1 (&q->lock){-.-.-.}:
> >        [<c0168746>] __lock_acquire+0xfd6/0x12d5
> >        [<c0168afc>] lock_acquire+0xb7/0xeb
> >        [<c03d1249>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x5e
> >        [<c012cc9c>] __wake_up+0x26/0x5c
> >        [<c0151053>] insert_work+0x7b/0x95
> >        [<c0151a02>] __queue_work+0x2e/0x4e
> >        [<c0151a5e>] delayed_work_timer_fn+0x3c/0x4f
> >        [<c014925b>] run_timer_softirq+0x180/0x206
> >        [<c01445cb>] __do_softirq+0xc3/0x18d
> >        [<c01446d9>] do_softirq+0x44/0x7a
> >        [<c0144823>] irq_exit+0x43/0x87
> >        [<c0117cbd>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x7c/0x9b
> >        [<c0103956>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x36/0x40
> >        [<c0101ed0>] cpu_idle+0xa2/0xbe
> >        [<c03bcef6>] rest_init+0x66/0x79
> >        [<c0537a98>] start_kernel+0x396/0x3ae
> >        [<c053707f>] __init_begin+0x7f/0x98
> >        [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
> > 
> > -> #0 (&cwq->lock){-.-...}:
> >        [<c0168496>] __lock_acquire+0xd26/0x12d5
> >        [<c0168afc>] lock_acquire+0xb7/0xeb
> >        [<c03d1249>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x5e
> >        [<c01519f3>] __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e
> >        [<c0151ab9>] queue_work_on+0x48/0x63
> >        [<c0151c1d>] queue_work+0x23/0x38
> >        [<c0151c50>] schedule_work+0x1e/0x31
> >        [<f7f9ed69>] fscache_enqueue_operation+0xc5/0x102 [fscache]
> >        [<f80b6142>] cachefiles_read_waiter+0xb3/0xcd [cachefiles]
> >        [<c01292ae>] __wake_up_common+0x4c/0x85
> >        [<c012ccae>] __wake_up+0x38/0x5c
> >        [<c015568f>] __wake_up_bit+0x34/0x4b
> >        [<c01ad459>] unlock_page+0x55/0x6a
> >        [<c020fb6b>] mpage_end_io_read+0x4e/0x71
> >        [<c020a4da>] bio_endio+0x31/0x44
> >        [<c027759c>] req_bio_endio+0xab/0xde
> >        [<c027774c>] blk_update_request+0x17d/0x321
> >        [<c0277912>] blk_update_bidi_request+0x22/0x62
> >        [<c02792c4>] blk_end_bidi_request+0x25/0x6e
> >        [<c0279371>] blk_end_request+0x1a/0x30
> >        [<f82811da>] scsi_io_completion+0x193/0x3bb [scsi_mod]
> >        [<f827a888>] scsi_finish_command+0xd9/0xf2 [scsi_mod]
> >        [<f8281522>] scsi_softirq_done+0xf4/0x10d [scsi_mod]
> >        [<c027fcdf>] blk_done_softirq+0x6f/0x8e
> >        [<c01445cb>] __do_softirq+0xc3/0x18d
> >        [<c01446d9>] do_softirq+0x44/0x7a
> >        [<c0144823>] irq_exit+0x43/0x87
> >        [<c01049fd>] do_IRQ+0x8d/0xb2
> >        [<c0103595>] common_interrupt+0x35/0x40
> >        [<c0101ed0>] cpu_idle+0xa2/0xbe
> >        [<c03bcef6>] rest_init+0x66/0x79
> >        [<c0537a98>] start_kernel+0x396/0x3ae
> >        [<c053707f>] __init_begin+0x7f/0x98
> >        [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
> > 
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> > 
> > 1 lock held by swapper/0:
> >  #0:  (&q->lock){-.-.-.}, at: [<c012cc9c>] __wake_up+0x26/0x5c
> > 
> > stack backtrace:
> > Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.30-test #7
> > Call Trace:
> >  [<c03cde42>] ? printk+0x1d/0x33
> >  [<c0167349>] print_circular_bug_tail+0xaf/0xcb
> >  [<c0168496>] __lock_acquire+0xd26/0x12d5
> >  [<c01519f3>] ? __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e
> >  [<c0168afc>] lock_acquire+0xb7/0xeb
> >  [<c01519f3>] ? __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e
> >  [<c01519f3>] ? __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e
> >  [<c03d1249>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x5e
> >  [<c01519f3>] ? __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e
> >  [<c01519f3>] __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e
> >  [<c0151ab9>] queue_work_on+0x48/0x63
> >  [<c0151c1d>] queue_work+0x23/0x38
> >  [<c0151c50>] schedule_work+0x1e/0x31
> >  [<f7f9ed69>] fscache_enqueue_operation+0xc5/0x102 [fscache]
> >  [<f80b6142>] cachefiles_read_waiter+0xb3/0xcd [cachefiles]
> >  [<c01292ae>] __wake_up_common+0x4c/0x85
> >  [<c012ccae>] __wake_up+0x38/0x5c
> >  [<c015568f>] __wake_up_bit+0x34/0x4b
> >  [<c01ad459>] unlock_page+0x55/0x6a
> >  [<c020fb6b>] mpage_end_io_read+0x4e/0x71
> >  [<c020a4da>] bio_endio+0x31/0x44
> >  [<c027759c>] req_bio_endio+0xab/0xde
> >  [<c027774c>] blk_update_request+0x17d/0x321
> >  [<c0277912>] blk_update_bidi_request+0x22/0x62
> >  [<c02792c4>] blk_end_bidi_request+0x25/0x6e
> >  [<c0279371>] blk_end_request+0x1a/0x30
> >  [<f82811da>] scsi_io_completion+0x193/0x3bb [scsi_mod]
> >  [<c0166b5b>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x19/0x2c
> >  [<f8280f43>] ? scsi_device_unbusy+0x92/0xaa [scsi_mod]
> >  [<f827a888>] scsi_finish_command+0xd9/0xf2 [scsi_mod]
> >  [<f8281522>] scsi_softirq_done+0xf4/0x10d [scsi_mod]
> >  [<c027fcdf>] blk_done_softirq+0x6f/0x8e
> >  [<c01445cb>] __do_softirq+0xc3/0x18d
> >  [<c01446d9>] do_softirq+0x44/0x7a
> >  [<c0144823>] irq_exit+0x43/0x87
> >  [<c01049fd>] do_IRQ+0x8d/0xb2
> >  [<c0103595>] common_interrupt+0x35/0x40
> >  [<c0109860>] ? mwait_idle+0x98/0xec
> >  [<c0101ed0>] cpu_idle+0xa2/0xbe
> >  [<c03bcef6>] rest_init+0x66/0x79
> >  [<c0537a98>] start_kernel+0x396/0x3ae
> >  [<c053707f>] __init_begin+0x7f/0x98
--
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/