[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f62b6a26-5c8c-91d5-efda-47b508879c58@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 18:43:59 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] locking/lockdep: add debug_show_all_lock_holders()
Ingo or Peter, are you there?
Linus is expecting that this patch (if acceptable) is sent from the locking people.
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wjbu9USn=hVWQ9v9t1H+8R6qXj8REkm36==w10zM0cM6g@mail.gmail.com
On 2023/02/02 22:59, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Currently, check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks() reports details of locks
> held in the system. Also, lockdep_print_held_locks() does not report
> details of locks held by a thread if that thread is in TASK_RUNNING state.
> Several years of experience of debugging without vmcore tells me that
> these limitations have been a barrier for understanding what went wrong
> in syzbot's "INFO: task hung in" reports.
>
> I initially thought that the cause of "INFO: task hung in" reports is
> due to over-stressing. But I understood that over-stressing is unlikely.
> I now consider that there likely is a deadlock/livelock bug where lockdep
> cannot report as a deadlock when "INFO: task hung in" is reported.
>
> A typical case is that thread-1 is waiting for something to happen (e.g.
> wait_event_*()) with a lock held. When thread-2 tries to hold that lock
> using e.g. mutex_lock(), check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks() reports that
> thread-2 is hung and thread-1 is holding a lock which thread-2 is trying
> to hold. But currently check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks() cannot report
> the exact location of thread-1 which gives us an important hint for
> understanding why thread-1 is holding that lock for so long period.
>
> When check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks() reports a thread waiting for a
> lock, it is important to report backtrace of threads which already held
> that lock. Therefore, allow check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks() to report
> the exact location of threads which is holding any lock.
>
> debug_show_all_lock_holders() skips current thread if the caller is
> holding no lock, for reporting RCU lock taken inside that function is
> generally useless.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> Unshare debug_show_all_lock_holders() and debug_show_all_locks(),
> suggested by Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>.
>
> Changes in v2:
> Share debug_show_all_lock_holders() and debug_show_all_locks(),
> suggested by Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>.
>
> include/linux/debug_locks.h | 5 +++++
> kernel/hung_task.c | 2 +-
> kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists