| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <tip-8930ed80f970a90a795239e7415c9b0e6f964649@git.kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 13:32:50 -0700
From: tip-bot for Thomas Gleixner <tipbot@...or.com>
To: linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...nel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
laijs@...fujitsu.com
Subject: [tip:locking/core] rtmutex: Cleanup deadlock detector debug logic
Commit-ID: 8930ed80f970a90a795239e7415c9b0e6f964649
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/8930ed80f970a90a795239e7415c9b0e6f964649
Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
AuthorDate: Thu, 22 May 2014 03:25:47 +0000
Committer: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CommitDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 22:05:30 +0200
rtmutex: Cleanup deadlock detector debug logic
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: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140522031949.947264874@linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c | 5 +--
kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.h | 7 ++--
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
kernel/locking/rtmutex.h | 7 +++-
kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h | 15 ++++++++
5 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c
index 49b2ed3..62b6cee 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c
@@ -66,12 +66,13 @@ void rt_mutex_debug_task_free(struct task_struct *task)
* the deadlock. We print when we return. act_waiter can be NULL in
* case of a remove waiter operation.
*/
-void debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(int detect, struct rt_mutex_waiter *act_waiter,
+void debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk,
+ struct rt_mutex_waiter *act_waiter,
struct rt_mutex *lock)
{
struct task_struct *task;
- if (!debug_locks || detect || !act_waiter)
+ if (!debug_locks || chwalk == RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK || !act_waiter)
return;
task = rt_mutex_owner(act_waiter->lock);
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.h b/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.h
index ab29b6a..d0519c3 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.h
@@ -20,14 +20,15 @@ extern void debug_rt_mutex_unlock(struct rt_mutex *lock);
extern void debug_rt_mutex_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
struct task_struct *powner);
extern void debug_rt_mutex_proxy_unlock(struct rt_mutex *lock);
-extern void debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(int detect, struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
+extern void debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk,
+ struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
struct rt_mutex *lock);
extern void debug_rt_mutex_print_deadlock(struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter);
# define debug_rt_mutex_reset_waiter(w) \
do { (w)->deadlock_lock = NULL; } while (0)
-static inline int debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
- int detect)
+static inline bool debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk walk)
{
return (waiter != NULL);
}
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index 3290648..c6ffdaa 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -308,6 +308,32 @@ static void rt_mutex_adjust_prio(struct task_struct *task)
}
/*
+ * Deadlock detection is conditional:
+ *
+ * If CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES=n, deadlock detection is only conducted
+ * if the detect argument is == RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK.
+ *
+ * If CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES=y, deadlock detection is always
+ * conducted independent of the detect argument.
+ *
+ * If the waiter argument is NULL this indicates the deboost path and
+ * deadlock detection is disabled independent of the detect argument
+ * and the config settings.
+ */
+static bool rt_mutex_cond_detect_deadlock(struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk)
+{
+ /*
+ * This is just a wrapper function for the following call,
+ * because debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock() smells like a magic
+ * debug feature and I wanted to keep the cond function in the
+ * main source file along with the comments instead of having
+ * two of the same in the headers.
+ */
+ return debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(waiter, chwalk);
+}
+
+/*
* Max number of times we'll walk the boosting chain:
*/
int max_lock_depth = 1024;
@@ -381,7 +407,7 @@ static inline struct rt_mutex *task_blocked_on_lock(struct task_struct *p)
* goto again;
*/
static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(struct task_struct *task,
- int deadlock_detect,
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk,
struct rt_mutex *orig_lock,
struct rt_mutex *next_lock,
struct rt_mutex_waiter *orig_waiter,
@@ -389,12 +415,12 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(struct task_struct *task,
{
struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter, *top_waiter = orig_waiter;
struct rt_mutex_waiter *prerequeue_top_waiter;
- int detect_deadlock, ret = 0, depth = 0;
+ int ret = 0, depth = 0;
struct rt_mutex *lock;
+ bool detect_deadlock;
unsigned long flags;
- detect_deadlock = debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(orig_waiter,
- deadlock_detect);
+ detect_deadlock = rt_mutex_cond_detect_deadlock(orig_waiter, chwalk);
/*
* The (de)boosting is a step by step approach with a lot of
@@ -520,7 +546,7 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(struct task_struct *task,
* walk, we detected a deadlock.
*/
if (lock == orig_lock || rt_mutex_owner(lock) == top_task) {
- debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(deadlock_detect, orig_waiter, lock);
+ debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(chwalk, orig_waiter, lock);
raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
ret = -EDEADLK;
goto out_unlock_pi;
@@ -784,7 +810,7 @@ takeit:
static int task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex *lock,
struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
struct task_struct *task,
- int detect_deadlock)
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk)
{
struct task_struct *owner = rt_mutex_owner(lock);
struct rt_mutex_waiter *top_waiter = waiter;
@@ -830,7 +856,7 @@ static int task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex *lock,
__rt_mutex_adjust_prio(owner);
if (owner->pi_blocked_on)
chain_walk = 1;
- } else if (debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(waiter, detect_deadlock)) {
+ } else if (rt_mutex_cond_detect_deadlock(waiter, chwalk)) {
chain_walk = 1;
}
@@ -855,7 +881,7 @@ static int task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex *lock,
raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
- res = rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(owner, detect_deadlock, lock,
+ res = rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(owner, chwalk, lock,
next_lock, waiter, task);
raw_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
@@ -960,7 +986,8 @@ static void remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex *lock,
raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
- rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(owner, 0, lock, next_lock, NULL, current);
+ rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(owner, RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK, lock,
+ next_lock, NULL, current);
raw_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
}
@@ -990,7 +1017,8 @@ void rt_mutex_adjust_pi(struct task_struct *task)
/* gets dropped in rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain()! */
get_task_struct(task);
- rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(task, 0, NULL, next_lock, NULL, task);
+ rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(task, RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK, NULL,
+ next_lock, NULL, task);
}
/**
@@ -1068,7 +1096,7 @@ static void rt_mutex_handle_deadlock(int res, int detect_deadlock,
static int __sched
rt_mutex_slowlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
struct hrtimer_sleeper *timeout,
- int detect_deadlock)
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk)
{
struct rt_mutex_waiter waiter;
int ret = 0;
@@ -1094,7 +1122,7 @@ rt_mutex_slowlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
timeout->task = NULL;
}
- ret = task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(lock, &waiter, current, detect_deadlock);
+ ret = task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(lock, &waiter, current, chwalk);
if (likely(!ret))
ret = __rt_mutex_slowlock(lock, state, timeout, &waiter);
@@ -1103,7 +1131,7 @@ rt_mutex_slowlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
if (unlikely(ret)) {
remove_waiter(lock, &waiter);
- rt_mutex_handle_deadlock(ret, detect_deadlock, &waiter);
+ rt_mutex_handle_deadlock(ret, chwalk, &waiter);
}
/*
@@ -1230,27 +1258,29 @@ static inline int
rt_mutex_fastlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
int (*slowfn)(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
struct hrtimer_sleeper *timeout,
- int detect_deadlock))
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk))
{
if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, NULL, current))) {
rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock(lock, current);
return 0;
} else
- return slowfn(lock, state, NULL, 0);
+ return slowfn(lock, state, NULL, RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK);
}
static inline int
rt_mutex_timed_fastlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
- struct hrtimer_sleeper *timeout, int detect_deadlock,
+ struct hrtimer_sleeper *timeout,
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk,
int (*slowfn)(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
struct hrtimer_sleeper *timeout,
- int detect_deadlock))
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk))
{
- if (!detect_deadlock && likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, NULL, current))) {
+ if (chwalk == RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK &&
+ likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, NULL, current))) {
rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock(lock, current);
return 0;
} else
- return slowfn(lock, state, timeout, detect_deadlock);
+ return slowfn(lock, state, timeout, chwalk);
}
static inline int
@@ -1312,7 +1342,8 @@ int rt_mutex_timed_futex_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
{
might_sleep();
- return rt_mutex_timed_fastlock(lock, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, timeout, 1,
+ return rt_mutex_timed_fastlock(lock, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, timeout,
+ RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK,
rt_mutex_slowlock);
}
@@ -1334,7 +1365,8 @@ rt_mutex_timed_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock, struct hrtimer_sleeper *timeout)
{
might_sleep();
- return rt_mutex_timed_fastlock(lock, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, timeout, 0,
+ return rt_mutex_timed_fastlock(lock, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, timeout,
+ RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK,
rt_mutex_slowlock);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rt_mutex_timed_lock);
@@ -1463,7 +1495,8 @@ int rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
}
/* We enforce deadlock detection for futexes */
- ret = task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(lock, waiter, task, 1);
+ ret = task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(lock, waiter, task,
+ RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK);
if (ret && !rt_mutex_owner(lock)) {
/*
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.h b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.h
index f6a1f3c..c406058 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.h
@@ -22,10 +22,15 @@
#define debug_rt_mutex_init(m, n) do { } while (0)
#define debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(d, a ,l) do { } while (0)
#define debug_rt_mutex_print_deadlock(w) do { } while (0)
-#define debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(w,d) (d)
#define debug_rt_mutex_reset_waiter(w) do { } while (0)
static inline void rt_mutex_print_deadlock(struct rt_mutex_waiter *w)
{
WARN(1, "rtmutex deadlock detected\n");
}
+
+static inline bool debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(struct rt_mutex_waiter *w,
+ enum rtmutex_chainwalk walk)
+{
+ return walk == RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK;
+}
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
index cd3ec20..8552125 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
@@ -102,6 +102,21 @@ static inline struct task_struct *rt_mutex_owner(struct rt_mutex *lock)
}
/*
+ * Constants for rt mutex functions which have a selectable deadlock
+ * detection.
+ *
+ * RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK: Stops the lock chain walk when there are
+ * no further PI adjustments to be made.
+ *
+ * RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK: Invoke deadlock detection with a full
+ * walk of the lock chain.
+ */
+enum rtmutex_chainwalk {
+ RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK,
+ RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK,
+};
+
+/*
* PI-futex support (proxy locking functions, etc.):
*/
extern struct task_struct *rt_mutex_next_owner(struct rt_mutex *lock);
--
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