[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250609180125.2988129-2-joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 14:01:24 -0400
From: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>
Cc: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>,
rcu@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] rcu: Fix lockup when RCU reader used while IRQ exiting
During rcu_read_unlock_special(), if this happens during irq_exit(), we
can lockup if an IPI is issued. This is because the IPI itself triggers
the irq_exit() path causing a recursive lock up.
This is precisely what Xiongfeng found when invoking a BPF program on
the trace_tick_stop() tracepoint As shown in the trace below. Fix by
using context-tracking to tell us if we're still in an IRQ.
context-tracking keeps track of the IRQ until after the tracepoint, so
it cures the issues.
irq_exit()
__irq_exit_rcu()
/* in_hardirq() returns false after this */
preempt_count_sub(HARDIRQ_OFFSET)
tick_irq_exit()
tick_nohz_irq_exit()
tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick()
trace_tick_stop() /* a bpf prog is hooked on this trace point */
__bpf_trace_tick_stop()
bpf_trace_run2()
rcu_read_unlock_special()
/* will send a IPI to itself */
irq_work_queue_on(&rdp->defer_qs_iw, rdp->cpu);
A simple reproducer can also be obtained by doing the following in
tick_irq_exit(). It will hang on boot without the patch:
static inline void tick_irq_exit(void)
{
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ WRITE_ONCE(current->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.need_qs, true);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+
While at it, add some comments to this code.
Reported-by: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/9acd5f9f-6732-7701-6880-4b51190aa070@huawei.com/
Tested-by: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>
---
kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
index 3c0bbbbb686f..53d8b3415776 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
@@ -653,6 +653,9 @@ static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
struct rcu_node *rnp = rdp->mynode;
+ // In cases where the RCU-reader is boosted, we'd attempt deboost sooner than
+ // later to prevent inducing latency to other RT tasks. Also, expedited GPs
+ // should not be delayed too much. Track both these needs in expboost.
expboost = (t->rcu_blocked_node && READ_ONCE(t->rcu_blocked_node->exp_tasks)) ||
(rdp->grpmask & READ_ONCE(rnp->expmask)) ||
(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_STRICT_GRACE_PERIOD) &&
@@ -670,10 +673,15 @@ static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
// Also if no expediting and no possible deboosting,
// slow is OK. Plus nohz_full CPUs eventually get
// tick enabled.
+ //
+ // Also prevent doing this if context-tracking thinks
+ // we're handling an IRQ (including when we're exiting
+ // one -- required to prevent self-IPI deadloops).
set_tsk_need_resched(current);
set_preempt_need_resched();
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IRQ_WORK) && irqs_were_disabled &&
- expboost && !rdp->defer_qs_iw_pending && cpu_online(rdp->cpu)) {
+ expboost && !rdp->defer_qs_iw_pending && cpu_online(rdp->cpu) &&
+ !ct_in_irq()) {
// Get scheduler to re-evaluate and call hooks.
// If !IRQ_WORK, FQS scan will eventually IPI.
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_STRICT_GRACE_PERIOD) &&
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists