[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1570632374.5937.8.camel@lca.pw>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 10:46:14 -0400
From: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
peterz@...radead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
john.ogness@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
PeterOberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>, david@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/page_isolation: fix a deadlock with printk()
On Wed, 2019-10-09 at 16:24 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Wed 2019-10-09 09:43:13, Qian Cai wrote:
> > On Wed, 2019-10-09 at 15:27 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 09-10-19 09:06:42, Qian Cai wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/1570460350.5576.290.camel@lca.pw/
> > > >
> > > > [ 297.425964] -> #1 (&port_lock_key){-.-.}:
> > > > [ 297.425967] __lock_acquire+0x5b3/0xb40
> > > > [ 297.425967] lock_acquire+0x126/0x280
> > > > [ 297.425968] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3a/0x50
> > > > [ 297.425969] serial8250_console_write+0x3e4/0x450
> > > > [ 297.425970] univ8250_console_write+0x4b/0x60
> > > > [ 297.425970] console_unlock+0x501/0x750
> > > > [ 297.425971] vprintk_emit+0x10d/0x340
> > > > [ 297.425972] vprintk_default+0x1f/0x30
> > > > [ 297.425972] vprintk_func+0x44/0xd4
> > > > [ 297.425973] printk+0x9f/0xc5
> > > > [ 297.425974] register_console+0x39c/0x520
> > > > [ 297.425975] univ8250_console_init+0x23/0x2d
> > > > [ 297.425975] console_init+0x338/0x4cd
> > > > [ 297.425976] start_kernel+0x534/0x724
> > > > [ 297.425977] x86_64_start_reservations+0x24/0x26
> > > > [ 297.425977] x86_64_start_kernel+0xf4/0xfb
> > > > [ 297.425978] secondary_startup_64+0xb6/0xc0
> > > >
> > > > where the report again show the early boot call trace for the locking
> > > > dependency,
> > > >
> > > > console_owner --> port_lock_key
> > > >
> > > > but that dependency clearly not only happen in the early boot.
> > >
> > > Can you provide an example of the runtime dependency without any early
> > > boot artifacts? Because this discussion really doens't make much sense
> > > without a clear example of a _real_ lockdep report that is not a false
> > > possitive. All of them so far have been concluded to be false possitive
> > > AFAIU.
> >
> > An obvious one is in the above link. Just replace the trace in #1 above with
> > printk() from anywhere, i.e., just ignore the early boot calls there as they are
> > not important.
> >
> > printk()
> > console_unlock()
> > console_lock_spinning_enable() --> console_owner_lock
> > call_console_drivers()
> > serial8250_console_write() --> port->lock
>
> Please, find the location where this really happens and then suggests
> how the real deadlock could get fixed. So far, we have seen only
> false positives and theoretical scenarios.
Now the bar is higher again. You are now asking me to actually trigger this
potential deadlock live. I am probably better off buying some lottery tickets
then if I could be that lucky.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists