[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0b229aef-5be1-19af-4723-cd7428187b74@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:59:14 -0500
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debugobjects: Move printk out of db lock critical
sections
On 12/12/2018 09:03 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (12/12/18 17:28), Waiman Long wrote:
>> The db->lock is a raw spinlock and so the lock hold time is supposed
>> to be short. This will not be the case when printk() is being involved
>> in some of the critical sections. In order to avoid the long hold time,
>> in case some messages need to be printed, the debug_object_is_on_stack()
>> and debug_print_object() calls are now moved out of those critical
>> sections.
>>
>> Holding the db->lock while calling printk() may lead to deadlock if
>> printk() somehow requires the allocation/freeing of debug object that
>> happens to be in the same hash bucket or a circular lock dependency
>> warning from lockdep as reported in https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/12/11/143.
>>
>> [ 87.209665] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>> [ 87.210547] 4.20.0-rc4-00057-gc96cf92 #1 Tainted: G W
>> [ 87.211449] ------------------------------------------------------
>> [ 87.212405] getty/519 is trying to acquire lock:
>> [ 87.213074] (____ptrval____) (&obj_hash[i].lock){-.-.}, at: debug_check_no_obj_freed+0xb4/0x302
>> [ 87.214343]
>> [ 87.214343] but task is already holding lock:
>> [ 87.215174] (____ptrval____) (&port_lock_key){-.-.}, at: uart_shutdown+0x3a3/0x4e2
>> [ 87.216260]
>> [ 87.216260] which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>
>> This patch was also found to be able to fix a boot hanging problem
>> when the initramfs image was switched on after a debugobjects splat
>> from the EFI code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> The patch looks good to me. A bit curious if we need to also patch
> the self-test part debugobjects - check_results(). That guy still
> printk()-s under bucket ->lock.
>
> -ss
Yes, I should have changed those in the check_results() as well.
-Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists