| 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: <20141022143837.GW4977@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 07:38:37 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...aro.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: lockdep splat in CPU hotplug
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:53:49AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am seeing the lockdep report below when resuming from suspend-to-disk
> > with current Linus' tree (c2661b80609).
> >
> > The reason for CCing Ingo and Peter is that I can't make any sense of one
> > of the stacktraces lockdep is providing.
> >
> > Please have a look at the very first stacktrace in the dump, where lockdep
> > is trying to explain where cpu_hotplug.lock#2 has been acquired. It seems
> > to imply that cpuidle_pause() is taking cpu_hotplug.lock, but that's not
> > the case at all.
> >
> > What am I missing?
>
> Okay, reverting 442bf3aaf55a ("sched: Let the scheduler see CPU idle
> states") and followup 83a0a96a5f26 ("sched/fair: Leverage the idle state
> info when choosing the "idlest" cpu") which depends on it makes the splat
> go away.
>
> Just for the sake of testing the hypothesis, I did just the minimal change
> below on top of current Linus' tree, and it also makes the splat go away
> (of course it's totally incorrect thing to do by itself alone):
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> index 125150d..d31e04c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> @@ -225,12 +225,6 @@ void cpuidle_uninstall_idle_handler(void)
> initialized = 0;
> wake_up_all_idle_cpus();
> }
> -
> - /*
> - * Make sure external observers (such as the scheduler)
> - * are done looking at pointed idle states.
> - */
> - synchronize_rcu();
> }
>
> /**
>
> So indeed 442bf3aaf55a is guilty.
>
> Paul was stating yesterday that it can't be the try_get_online_cpus() in
> synchronize_sched_expedited(), as it's doing only trylock. There are
> however more places where synchronize_sched_expedited() is acquiring
> cpu_hotplug.lock unconditionally by calling put_online_cpus(), so the race
> seems real.
Gah! So I only half-eliminated the deadlock between
synchronize_sched_expedited() and CPU hotplug. Back to the drawing
board...
Thanx, Paul
> Adding people involved in 442bf3aaf55a to CC.
>
> Still, the lockdep stacktrace is bogus and didn't really help
> understanding this. Any idea why it's wrong?
>
> > ======================================================
> > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> > 3.18.0-rc1-00069-gc2661b8 #1 Not tainted
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > do_s2disk/2367 is trying to acquire lock:
> > (cpuidle_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff814916c2>] cpuidle_pause_and_lock+0x12/0x20
> >
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > (cpu_hotplug.lock#2){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810522ea>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x4a/0x80
> >
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> >
> > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> >
> > -> #1 (cpu_hotplug.lock#2){+.+.+.}:
> > [<ffffffff81099fac>] lock_acquire+0xac/0x130
> > [<ffffffff815b9f2c>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5c/0x3b0
> > [<ffffffff81491892>] cpuidle_pause+0x12/0x30
> > [<ffffffff81402314>] dpm_suspend_noirq+0x44/0x340
> > [<ffffffff81402958>] dpm_suspend_end+0x38/0x80
> > [<ffffffff810a07bd>] hibernation_snapshot+0xcd/0x370
> > [<ffffffff810a1248>] hibernate+0x168/0x210
> > [<ffffffff8109e9b4>] state_store+0xe4/0xf0
> > [<ffffffff813003ef>] kobj_attr_store+0xf/0x20
> > [<ffffffff8121e9a3>] sysfs_kf_write+0x43/0x60
> > [<ffffffff8121e287>] kernfs_fop_write+0xe7/0x170
> > [<ffffffff811a7342>] vfs_write+0xb2/0x1f0
> > [<ffffffff811a7da4>] SyS_write+0x44/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff815be856>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> >
> > -> #0 (cpuidle_lock){+.+.+.}:
> > [<ffffffff81099433>] __lock_acquire+0x1a03/0x1e30
> > [<ffffffff81099fac>] lock_acquire+0xac/0x130
> > [<ffffffff815b9f2c>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5c/0x3b0
> > [<ffffffff814916c2>] cpuidle_pause_and_lock+0x12/0x20
> > [<ffffffffc02e184c>] acpi_processor_hotplug+0x45/0x8a [processor]
> > [<ffffffffc02df25a>] acpi_cpu_soft_notify+0xad/0xe3 [processor]
> > [<ffffffff81071393>] notifier_call_chain+0x53/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff810713e9>] __raw_notifier_call_chain+0x9/0x10
> > [<ffffffff810521ce>] cpu_notify+0x1e/0x40
> > [<ffffffff810524a8>] _cpu_up+0x148/0x160
> > [<ffffffff815a7b99>] enable_nonboot_cpus+0xc9/0x1d0
> > [<ffffffff810a0955>] hibernation_snapshot+0x265/0x370
> > [<ffffffff810a1248>] hibernate+0x168/0x210
> > [<ffffffff8109e9b4>] state_store+0xe4/0xf0
> > [<ffffffff813003ef>] kobj_attr_store+0xf/0x20
> > [<ffffffff8121e9a3>] sysfs_kf_write+0x43/0x60
> > [<ffffffff8121e287>] kernfs_fop_write+0xe7/0x170
> > [<ffffffff811a7342>] vfs_write+0xb2/0x1f0
> > [<ffffffff811a7da4>] SyS_write+0x44/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff815be856>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> >
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > ---- ----
> > lock(cpu_hotplug.lock#2);
> > lock(cpuidle_lock);
> > lock(cpu_hotplug.lock#2);
> > lock(cpuidle_lock);
> >
> > *** DEADLOCK ***
> >
> > 8 locks held by do_s2disk/2367:
> > #0: (sb_writers#6){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff811a7443>] vfs_write+0x1b3/0x1f0
> > #1: (&of->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8121e25b>] kernfs_fop_write+0xbb/0x170
> > #2: (s_active#188){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff8121e263>] kernfs_fop_write+0xc3/0x170
> > #3: (pm_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810a112e>] hibernate+0x4e/0x210
> > #4: (device_hotplug_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff813f1b52>] lock_device_hotplug+0x12/0x20
> > #5: (cpu_add_remove_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff815a7aef>] enable_nonboot_cpus+0x1f/0x1d0
> > #6: (cpu_hotplug.lock){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff810522a0>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x0/0x80
> > #7: (cpu_hotplug.lock#2){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810522ea>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x4a/0x80
> >
> > stack backtrace:
> > CPU: 1 PID: 2367 Comm: do_s2disk Not tainted 3.18.0-rc1-00069-g4da0564 #1
> > Hardware name: LENOVO 7470BN2/7470BN2, BIOS 6DET38WW (2.02 ) 12/19/2008
> > ffffffff823e4330 ffff8800789e7a48 ffffffff815b6754 0000000000001a69
> > ffffffff823e4330 ffff8800789e7a98 ffffffff815b078b ffff8800741a5510
> > ffff8800789e7af8 ffff8800741a5ea8 5a024e919538010b ffff8800741a5ea8
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff815b6754>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x68
> > [<ffffffff815b078b>] print_circular_bug+0x203/0x214
> > [<ffffffff81099433>] __lock_acquire+0x1a03/0x1e30
> > [<ffffffff8109766d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xfd/0x1c0
> > [<ffffffff81099fac>] lock_acquire+0xac/0x130
> > [<ffffffff814916c2>] ? cpuidle_pause_and_lock+0x12/0x20
> > [<ffffffff815b9f2c>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5c/0x3b0
> > [<ffffffff814916c2>] ? cpuidle_pause_and_lock+0x12/0x20
> > [<ffffffff814916c2>] cpuidle_pause_and_lock+0x12/0x20
> > [<ffffffffc02e184c>] acpi_processor_hotplug+0x45/0x8a [processor]
> > [<ffffffffc02df25a>] acpi_cpu_soft_notify+0xad/0xe3 [processor]
> > [<ffffffff81071393>] notifier_call_chain+0x53/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff810713e9>] __raw_notifier_call_chain+0x9/0x10
> > [<ffffffff810521ce>] cpu_notify+0x1e/0x40
> > [<ffffffff810524a8>] _cpu_up+0x148/0x160
> > [<ffffffff815a7b99>] enable_nonboot_cpus+0xc9/0x1d0
> > [<ffffffff810a0955>] hibernation_snapshot+0x265/0x370
> > [<ffffffff810a1248>] hibernate+0x168/0x210
> > [<ffffffff8109e9b4>] state_store+0xe4/0xf0
> > [<ffffffff813003ef>] kobj_attr_store+0xf/0x20
> > [<ffffffff8121e9a3>] sysfs_kf_write+0x43/0x60
> > [<ffffffff8121e287>] kernfs_fop_write+0xe7/0x170
> > [<ffffffff811a7342>] vfs_write+0xb2/0x1f0
> > [<ffffffff815be87b>] ? sysret_check+0x1b/0x56
> > [<ffffffff811a7da4>] SyS_write+0x44/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff815be856>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>
> --
> Jiri Kosina
> SUSE Labs
>
--
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