| 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: <20170925221848.6646-6-boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 06:18:39 +0800
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Subject: [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v3 05/14] lockdep: Extend __bfs() to work with multiple kinds of dependencies
Now we have four kinds of dependencies in the dependency graph, and not
all the pathes carry strong dependencies, for example:
Given lock A, B, C, if we have:
CPU1 CPU2
============= ==============
write_lock(A); read_lock(B);
read_lock(B); write_lock(C);
then we have dependencies A--(NR)-->B, and B--(RN)-->C, (NR and
RN are to indicate the dependency kind), A actually doesn't have
strong dependency to C(IOW, C doesn't depend on A), to see this,
let's say we have a third CPU3 doing:
CPU3:
=============
write_lock(C);
write_lock(A);
, this is not a deadlock. However if we change the read_lock()
on CPU2 to a write_lock(), it's a deadlock then.
So A --(NR)--> B --(RN)--> C is not a strong dependency path but
A --(NR)--> B --(NN)-->C is a strong dependency path.
We can generalize this as: If a path of dependencies doesn't have two
adjacent dependencies as (*R)--L-->(R*), where L is some lock, it is a
strong dependency path, otherwise it's not.
Now our mission is to make __bfs() traverse only the strong dependency
paths, which is simple: we record whether we have --(*R)--> at the
current tail of the path in lock_list::is_rr, and whenever we pick a
dependency in the traverse, we 1) make sure we don't pick a --(R*)-->
dependency if our current tail is --(*R)--> and 2) greedily pick a
--(*N)--> as hard as possible.
With this extension for __bfs(), we now need to initialize the root of
__bfs() properly(with a correct ->is_rr), to do so, we introduce some
helper functions, which also cleans up a little bit for the __bfs() root
initialization code.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
---
include/linux/lockdep.h | 2 ++
kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/lockdep.h b/include/linux/lockdep.h
index 35b3fc0d6793..68cbe7e8399a 100644
--- a/include/linux/lockdep.h
+++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
@@ -194,6 +194,8 @@ struct lock_list {
int distance;
/* bitmap of different dependencies from head to this */
u16 dep;
+ /* used by BFS to record whether this is picked as a recursive read */
+ u16 is_rr;
/*
* The parent field is used to implement breadth-first search, and the
diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 3bc69848fe08..9e7647e40918 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -1052,6 +1052,54 @@ static inline unsigned int calc_dep(int prev, int next)
return 1U << __calc_dep_bit(prev, next);
}
+/*
+ * return -1 if no proper dependency could be picked
+ * return 0 if a * --> N dependency could be picked
+ * return 1 if only a * --> R dependency could be picked
+ *
+ * N: non-recursive lock
+ * R: recursive read lock
+ */
+static inline int pick_dep(u16 is_rr, u16 cap_dep)
+{
+ if (is_rr) { /* could only pick N --> */
+ if (cap_dep & DEP_NN_MASK)
+ return 0;
+ else if (cap_dep & DEP_NR_MASK)
+ return 1;
+ else
+ return -1;
+ } else {
+ if (cap_dep & DEP_NN_MASK || cap_dep & DEP_RN_MASK)
+ return 0;
+ else
+ return 1;
+ }
+}
+
+/*
+ * Initialize a lock_list entry @lock belonging to @class as the root for a BFS
+ * search.
+ */
+static inline void __bfs_init_root(struct lock_list *lock,
+ struct lock_class *class)
+{
+ lock->class = class;
+ lock->parent = NULL;
+ lock->is_rr = 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Initialize a lock_list entry @lock based on a lock acquisition @hlock as the
+ * root for a BFS search.
+ */
+static inline void bfs_init_root(struct lock_list *lock,
+ struct held_lock *hlock)
+{
+ __bfs_init_root(lock, hlock_class(hlock));
+ lock->is_rr = (hlock->read == 2);
+}
+
static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list *source_entry,
void *data,
int (*match)(struct lock_list *entry, void *data),
@@ -1062,6 +1110,7 @@ static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list *source_entry,
struct list_head *head;
struct circular_queue *cq = &lock_cq;
enum bfs_result ret = BFS_RNOMATCH;
+ int is_rr, next_is_rr;
if (match(source_entry, data)) {
*target_entry = source_entry;
@@ -1107,11 +1156,18 @@ static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list *source_entry,
else
head = &lock->class->locks_before;
+ is_rr = lock->is_rr;
+
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled());
list_for_each_entry_rcu(entry, head, entry) {
unsigned int cq_depth;
+ next_is_rr = pick_dep(is_rr, entry->dep);
+ if (next_is_rr < 0)
+ continue;
+ entry->is_rr = next_is_rr;
+
visit_lock_entry(entry, lock);
if (match(entry, data)) {
*target_entry = entry;
@@ -1362,8 +1418,7 @@ unsigned long lockdep_count_forward_deps(struct lock_class *class)
unsigned long ret, flags;
struct lock_list this;
- this.parent = NULL;
- this.class = class;
+ __bfs_init_root(&this, class);
local_irq_save(flags);
arch_spin_lock(&lockdep_lock);
@@ -1389,8 +1444,7 @@ unsigned long lockdep_count_backward_deps(struct lock_class *class)
unsigned long ret, flags;
struct lock_list this;
- this.parent = NULL;
- this.class = class;
+ __bfs_init_root(&this, class);
local_irq_save(flags);
arch_spin_lock(&lockdep_lock);
@@ -1677,17 +1731,14 @@ check_usage(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry1);
- this.parent = NULL;
-
- this.class = hlock_class(prev);
+ bfs_init_root(&this, prev);
ret = find_usage_backwards(&this, bit_backwards, &target_entry);
if (bfs_error(ret))
return print_bfs_bug(ret);
if (ret == BFS_RNOMATCH)
return 1;
- that.parent = NULL;
- that.class = hlock_class(next);
+ bfs_init_root(&that, next);
ret = find_usage_forwards(&that, bit_forwards, &target_entry1);
if (bfs_error(ret))
return print_bfs_bug(ret);
@@ -1946,8 +1997,7 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
* We are using global variables to control the recursion, to
* keep the stackframe size of the recursive functions low:
*/
- this.class = hlock_class(next);
- this.parent = NULL;
+ bfs_init_root(&this, next);
ret = check_noncircular(&this, hlock_class(prev), &target_entry);
if (unlikely(ret == BFS_RMATCH))
return print_circular_bug(&this, target_entry, next, prev, trace);
@@ -1996,8 +2046,7 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
/*
* Is the <prev> -> <next> link redundant?
*/
- this.class = hlock_class(prev);
- this.parent = NULL;
+ bfs_init_root(&this, prev);
ret = check_redundant(&this, hlock_class(next), &target_entry);
if (ret == BFS_RMATCH) {
debug_atomic_inc(nr_redundant);
@@ -2762,8 +2811,7 @@ check_usage_forwards(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
struct lock_list root;
struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
- root.parent = NULL;
- root.class = hlock_class(this);
+ bfs_init_root(&root, this);
ret = find_usage_forwards(&root, bit, &target_entry);
if (bfs_error(ret))
return print_bfs_bug(ret);
@@ -2786,8 +2834,7 @@ check_usage_backwards(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
struct lock_list root;
struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
- root.parent = NULL;
- root.class = hlock_class(this);
+ bfs_init_root(&root, this);
ret = find_usage_backwards(&root, bit, &target_entry);
if (bfs_error(ret))
return print_bfs_bug(ret);
--
2.14.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists