Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 22:05:53 +0200
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
 Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
 Linux LEDs <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
 Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
 davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
 pabeni@...hat.com, johanneswueller@...il.com,
 "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Genes Lists <lists@...ience.com>
Subject: Re: Hung tasks due to a AB-BA deadlock between the leds_list_lock
 rwsem and the rtnl mutex

Hi All,

On 5/31/24 12:22 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 5/31/24 11:50 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 5/31/24 10:39 AM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>> [adding the LED folks and the regressions list to the list of recipients]
>>>
>>> Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
>>> for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
>>>
>>> Lee, Pavel, could you look into below regression report please? Thread
>>> starts here:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/9d189ec329cfe68ed68699f314e191a10d4b5eda.camel@sapience.com/
>>>
>>> Another report with somewhat similar symptom can be found here:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e441605c-eaf2-4c2d-872b-d8e541f4cf60@gmail.com/
>>>
>>> See also Russell's analysis of that report below (many many thx for
>>> that, much appreciated Russel!).
>>>
>>> To my untrained eyes all of this sounds a lot like we still have a 6.9
>>> regression related to the LED code somewhere. Reminder, we had earlier
>>> trouble, but that was avoided through other measures:
>>>
>>> * 3d913719df14c2 ("wifi: iwlwifi: Use request_module_nowait") /
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/30f757e3-73c5-5473-c1f8-328bab98fd7d@candelatech.com/
>>>
>>> * c04d1b9ecce565 ("igc: Fix LED-related deadlock on driver unbind") /
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZhRD3cOtz5i-61PB@mail-itl/
>>>
>>> * 19fa4f2a85d777 ("r8169: fix LED-related deadlock on module removal")
>>>
>>> That iwlwifi commit even calls it self "work around". The developer that
>>> submitted it bisected the problem to a LED merge, but sadly that was the
>>> end of it. :-/
>>
>> I actually have been looking at a ledtrig-netdev lockdep warning yesterday
>> which I believe is the same thing. I'll include the lockdep trace below.
>>
>> According to lockdep there indeed is a ABBA (ish) cyclic deadlock with
>> the rtnl mutex vs led-triggers related locks. I believe that this problem
>> may be a pre-existing problem but this now actually gets hit in kernels >=
>> 6.9 because of commit 66601a29bb23 ("leds: class: If no default trigger is
>> given, make hw_control trigger the default trigger"). Before that commit
>> the "netdev" trigger would not be bound / set as phy LEDs trigger by default.
>>
>> +Cc Heiner Kallweit who authored that commit.
>>
>> The netdev trigger typically is not needed because the PHY LEDs are typically
>> under hw-control and the netdev trigger even tries to leave things that way
>> so setting it as the active trigger for the LED class device is basically
>> a no-op. I guess the goal of that commit is correctly have the triggers
>> file content reflect that the LED is controlled by a netdev and to allow
>> changing the hw-control mode without the user first needing to set netdev
>> as trigger before being able to change the mode.
>>
>> But there is a price to this, besides the locking problem this also
>> causes the ledtrig-netdev module to load on pretty much everyones
>> systems (when build as a module) even though 99.999% of our users
>> likely does not need this at all...
>>
>> Given this price and the troubles this is causing I think it might be best
>> to revert 66601a29bb23. There might still be a locking issue when setting
>> the trigger to netdev manually (I'll check and follow up) but this should
>> fix the regression users are hitting since typically users do not set
>> the trigger manually.
> 
> Ok, I can confirm that the lockdep warning is gone for me with 66601a29bb23
> reverted. Unfortunately it does still happen after a "modprobe ledtrig_netdev"
> (to add it to the list of available triggers) and then setting the trigger
> for /sys/class/leds/enp42s0-0::lan to netdev manually.
> 
> Still reverting 66601a29bb23 should avoid the problem getting triggered
> and this would seem like a safe fix especially for the 6.9 series and
> then the necessary time can be taken to fix the actual underlying locking
> issue which 66601a29bb23 exposes.

I recently wrote a new input-events LED trigger:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-leds/20240531135910.168965-2-hdegoede@redhat.com/

and I just found out this has a very similar deadlock problem. It seems
there it a generic problem with LEDs or LED triggers getting registered
by subsystems while holding a global lock from that subsystem vs
the activate / deactivate method of the trigger calling functions of that
same subsystem which require that same global lock.

I came up with a fix but that just fixed the activate() path leaving
a similar deadlock in place in the deactivate path:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-leds/20240601195528.48308-1-hdegoede@redhat.com/
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-leds/20240601195528.48308-3-hdegoede@redhat.com/

So this seems to be a non trivial problem to solve. For the new input-events
trigger I plan to solve this by switching to a single input_handler which will
be registered at module_init() time instead of having a handler per LED and
registering that handler at activate() time.

But I have no idea how to solve this for the netdev trigger I just wanted
to share my experience with the input-events trigger in case it is useful.

Regards,

Hans

Powered by blists - more mailing lists