linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] locking/rtmutex: Limit # of lock stealing for non-RT waiters

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e0724ba0-a8f6-b36b-0c09-fff48c4282ad@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jul 2022 16:02:21 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Mike Stowell <mstowell@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] locking/rtmutex: Limit # of lock stealing for non-RT
 waiters

On 7/11/22 05:34, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 09:59:16AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> Commit 48eb3f4fcfd3 ("locking/rtmutex: Implement equal priority lock
>> stealing") allows unlimited number of lock stealing's for non-RT
>> tasks. That can lead to lock starvation of non-RT top waiter tasks if
>> there is a constant incoming stream of non-RT lockers. This can cause
>> rcu_preempt self-detected stall or even task lockup in PREEMPT_RT kernel.
>> For example,
>>
>> [77107.424943] rcu: INFO: rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU
>> [ 1249.921363] INFO: task systemd:2178 blocked for more than 622 seconds.
>>
>> Avoiding this problem and ensuring forward progress by limiting the
>> number of times that a lock can be stolen from each waiter. This patch
>> sets a threshold of 32. That number is arbitrary and can be changed
>> if needed.
>>
> Why not do the same thing we do for regular mutexes?
>
The mutex way is another possible alternative. So we can set a flag to 
disable lock stealing if the current top waiter wake up and the rtmutex 
has been stolen. I will need to run some tests to find out how many time 
lock stealing can happen before it is blocked. I would like to allow 
sufficient number of lock stealing to minimize the performance impact of 
this change.

Cheers,
Longman