[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231206185837.GB9899@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2023 19:58:37 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mintu Patel <mintupatel89@...il.com>
Cc: badolevishal1116@...il.com, chinmoyghosh2001@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, vimal.kumar32@...il.com, will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rt_spin_lock: To list the correct owner of
rt_spin_lock
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 09:41:38PM +0530, Mintu Patel wrote:
> rt_spin_lock is actually mutex on RT Kernel so it goes for contention
> for lock. Currently owners of rt_spin_lock are decided before actual
> acquiring of lock. This patch would depict the correct owner of
> rt_spin_lock. The patch would help in solving crashes and deadlock
> due to race condition of lock
>
> acquiring rt_spin_lock acquired the lock released the lock
> <--------> <------->
> contention period Held period
>
> Thread1 Thread2
> _try_to_take_rt_mutex+0x95c+0x74 enqueue_task_dl+0x8cc/0x8dc
> rt_spin_lock_slowlock_locked+0xac+2 rt_mutex_setprio+0x28c/0x574
> rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x5c/0x90 task_blocks_rt_mutex+0x240/0x310
> rt_spin_lock+0x58/0x5c rt_spin_lock_slowlock_locked+0xac/0x2
> driverA_acquire_lock+0x28/0x56 rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x5c/0x90
> rt_spin_lock+0x58/0x5c
> driverB_acquire_lock+0x48/0x6c
>
> As per above call traces sample, Thread1 acquired the rt_spin_lock and
> went to critical section on the other hand Thread2 kept trying to acquire
> the same rt_spin_lock held by Thread1 ie contention period is too high.
> Finally Thread2 entered to dl queue due to high held time of the lock by
> Thread1. The below patch would help us to know the correct owner of
> rt_spin_lock and point us the driver's critical section. Respective
> driver need to be debugged for longer held period of lock.
>
> ex: cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace
>
> kworker/u13:0-150 [003] .....11 202.761025: rt_spinlock_acquire:
> Process: kworker/u13:0 is acquiring lock: &kbdev->hwaccess_lock
> kworker/u13:0-150 [003] .....11 202.761039: rt_spinlock_acquired:
> Process: kworker/u13:0 has acquired lock: &kbdev->hwaccess_lock
> kworker/u13:0-150 [003] .....11 202.761042: rt_spinlock_released:
> Process: kworker/u13:0 has released lock: &kbdev->hwaccess_lock
>
The above is word salad and makes no sense. No other lock has special
tracing like this, so rt_lock doesn't need it either.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists