Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1539088 > unrolled thread

[PATCH v4 00/15] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

Started byByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
First post2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
Last post2016-12-09 06:30 +0100
Articles 8 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel


Contents

  [PATCH v4 00/15] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
    [PATCH v4 09/15] lockdep: Make print_circular_bug() crosslock-aware Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
    [PATCH v4 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
    [PATCH v4 12/15] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked lock Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
    [PATCH v4 08/15] lockdep: Make crossrelease use save_stack_trace_fast() Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
    [PATCH v4 06/15] lockdep: Make save_trace can skip stack tracing of the current Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:30 +0100
    [PATCH v4 03/15] lockdep: Refactor lookup_chain_cache() Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:30 +0100
    [PATCH v4 04/15] lockdep: Add a function building a chain between two classes Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-12-09 06:30 +0100

#1539088 — [PATCH v4 00/15] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 00/15] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature
Message-ID<sMlLb-7BJ-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
I checked if crossrelease feature works well on my qemu-i386 machine.
There's no problem at all to work on mine. But I wonder if it's also
true even on other machines. Especially, on large system. Could you
let me know if it doesn't work on yours? Or Could you let me know if
crossrelease feature is useful? Please let me know if you need to
backport it to another version but it's not easy. Then I can provide
the backported version after working it.

I added output text of 'cat /proc/lockdep' on my machine applying
crossrelease feature, showing dependencies of lockdep. You can check
what kind of dependencies are added by crossrelease feature. Please
use '(complete)' or '(PG_locked)' as a keyword to find dependencies
added by this patch set.

And I still keep the base unchanged (v4.7). I will rebase it on the
latest once you have a consensus on it. Your opinions?

-----8<-----

Change from v3
	- reviced document

Change from v2
	- rebase on vanilla v4.7 tag
	- move lockdep data for page lock from struct page to page_ext
	- allocate plocks buffer via vmalloc instead of in struct task
	- enhanced comments and document
	- optimize performance
	- make reporting function crossrelease-aware

Change from v1
	- enhanced the document
	- removed save_stack_trace() optimizing patch
	- made this based on the seperated save_stack_trace patchset
	  https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1182242.html

Can we detect deadlocks below with original lockdep?

Example 1)

	PROCESS X	PROCESS Y
	--------------	--------------
	mutext_lock A
			lock_page B
	lock_page B
			mutext_lock A // DEADLOCK
	unlock_page B
			mutext_unlock A
	mutex_unlock A
			unlock_page B

where A and B are different lock classes.

No, we cannot.

Example 2)

	PROCESS X	PROCESS Y	PROCESS Z
	--------------	--------------	--------------
			mutex_lock A
	lock_page B
			lock_page B
					mutext_lock A // DEADLOCK
					mutext_unlock A
					unlock_page B
					(B was held by PROCESS X)
			unlock_page B
			mutex_unlock A

where A and B are different lock classes.

No, we cannot.

Example 3)

	PROCESS X	PROCESS Y
	--------------	--------------
			mutex_lock A
	mutex_lock A
	mutex_unlock A
			wait_for_complete B // DEADLOCK
	complete B
			mutex_unlock A

where A is a lock class and B is a completion variable.

No, we cannot.

Not only lock operations, but also any operations causing to wait or
spin for something can cause deadlock unless it's eventually *released*
by someone. The important point here is that the waiting or spinning
must be *released* by someone.

Using crossrelease feature, we can check dependency and detect deadlock
possibility not only for typical lock, but also for lock_page(),
wait_for_xxx() and so on, which might be released in any context.

See the last patch including the document for more information.

Byungchul Park (15):
  x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace
  x86/dumpstack: Add save_stack_trace()_fast()
  lockdep: Refactor lookup_chain_cache()
  lockdep: Add a function building a chain between two classes
  lockdep: Make check_prev_add can use a separate stack_trace
  lockdep: Make save_trace can skip stack tracing of the current
  lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature
  lockdep: Make crossrelease use save_stack_trace_fast()
  lockdep: Make print_circular_bug() crosslock-aware
  lockdep: Apply crossrelease to completion operation
  pagemap.h: Remove trailing white space
  lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked lock
  lockdep: Apply lock_acquire(release) on __Set(__Clear)PageLocked
  lockdep: Move data used in CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK from page to
    page_ext
  lockdep: Crossrelease feature documentation

 Documentation/locking/crossrelease.txt | 1053 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h      |    1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c            |    4 +
 arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c         |    2 +
 arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c           |   32 +
 include/linux/completion.h             |  121 +++-
 include/linux/irqflags.h               |   12 +-
 include/linux/lockdep.h                |  122 ++++
 include/linux/mm_types.h               |    4 +
 include/linux/page-flags.h             |   43 +-
 include/linux/page_ext.h               |    5 +
 include/linux/pagemap.h                |  124 +++-
 include/linux/sched.h                  |    5 +
 include/linux/stacktrace.h             |    2 +
 kernel/exit.c                          |    9 +
 kernel/fork.c                          |   20 +
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c               |  804 +++++++++++++++++++++---
 kernel/sched/completion.c              |   54 +-
 lib/Kconfig.debug                      |   30 +
 mm/filemap.c                           |   76 ++-
 mm/page_ext.c                          |    4 +
 21 files changed, 2392 insertions(+), 135 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/locking/crossrelease.txt

-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1539089 — [PATCH v4 09/15] lockdep: Make print_circular_bug() crosslock-aware

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 09/15] lockdep: Make print_circular_bug() crosslock-aware
Message-ID<sMlLc-7BJ-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1539088
Friends of print_circular_bug() reporting circular bug assumes that
target hlock is owned by the current. However, in crossrelease feature,
target hlock can be owned by any context.

In this case, the circular bug is caused by target hlock which cannot be
released since its dependent lock cannot be released. So the report
format needs to be changed to be aware of this.

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index fbd07ee..cb1a600 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -1126,22 +1126,41 @@ print_circular_lock_scenario(struct held_lock *src,
 		printk("\n\n");
 	}
 
-	printk(" Possible unsafe locking scenario:\n\n");
-	printk("       CPU0                    CPU1\n");
-	printk("       ----                    ----\n");
-	printk("  lock(");
-	__print_lock_name(target);
-	printk(");\n");
-	printk("                               lock(");
-	__print_lock_name(parent);
-	printk(");\n");
-	printk("                               lock(");
-	__print_lock_name(target);
-	printk(");\n");
-	printk("  lock(");
-	__print_lock_name(source);
-	printk(");\n");
-	printk("\n *** DEADLOCK ***\n\n");
+	if (cross_class(target)) {
+		printk(" Possible unsafe locking scenario by crosslock:\n\n");
+		printk("       CPU0                    CPU1\n");
+		printk("       ----                    ----\n");
+		printk("  lock(");
+		__print_lock_name(parent);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("  lock(");
+		__print_lock_name(target);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("                               lock(");
+		__print_lock_name(source);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("                               unlock(");
+		__print_lock_name(target);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("\n *** DEADLOCK ***\n\n");
+	} else {
+		printk(" Possible unsafe locking scenario:\n\n");
+		printk("       CPU0                    CPU1\n");
+		printk("       ----                    ----\n");
+		printk("  lock(");
+		__print_lock_name(target);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("                               lock(");
+		__print_lock_name(parent);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("                               lock(");
+		__print_lock_name(target);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("  lock(");
+		__print_lock_name(source);
+		printk(");\n");
+		printk("\n *** DEADLOCK ***\n\n");
+	}
 }
 
 /*
@@ -1166,7 +1185,10 @@ print_circular_bug_header(struct lock_list *entry, unsigned int depth,
 	printk("%s/%d is trying to acquire lock:\n",
 		curr->comm, task_pid_nr(curr));
 	print_lock(check_src);
-	printk("\nbut task is already holding lock:\n");
+	if (cross_class(hlock_class(check_tgt)))
+		printk("\nbut now in the release context of lock:\n");
+	else
+		printk("\nbut task is already holding lock:\n");
 	print_lock(check_tgt);
 	printk("\nwhich lock already depends on the new lock.\n\n");
 	printk("\nthe existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:\n");
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1539091 — [PATCH v4 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace
Message-ID<sMlLc-7BJ-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1539088
Currently, x86 implementation of save_stack_trace() is walking all stack
region word by word regardless of what the trace->max_entries is.
However, it's unnecessary to walk after already fulfilling caller's
requirement, say, if trace->nr_entries >= trace->max_entries is true.

I measured its overhead and printed its difference of sched_clock() with
my QEMU x86 machine. The latency was improved over 70% when
trace->max_entries = 5.

Before this patch:

[    2.329573] save_stack_trace() takes 76820 ns
[    2.329863] save_stack_trace() takes 62131 ns
[    2.330000] save_stack_trace() takes 99476 ns
[    2.329846] save_stack_trace() takes 62419 ns
[    2.330000] save_stack_trace() takes 88918 ns
[    2.330253] save_stack_trace() takes 73669 ns
[    2.330520] save_stack_trace() takes 67876 ns
[    2.330671] save_stack_trace() takes 75963 ns
[    2.330983] save_stack_trace() takes 95079 ns
[    2.330451] save_stack_trace() takes 62352 ns

After this patch:

[    2.795000] save_stack_trace() takes 21147 ns
[    2.795397] save_stack_trace() takes 20230 ns
[    2.795397] save_stack_trace() takes 31274 ns
[    2.795739] save_stack_trace() takes 19706 ns
[    2.796484] save_stack_trace() takes 20266 ns
[    2.796484] save_stack_trace() takes 20902 ns
[    2.797000] save_stack_trace() takes 38110 ns
[    2.797510] save_stack_trace() takes 20224 ns
[    2.798181] save_stack_trace() takes 20172 ns
[    2.798837] save_stack_trace() takes 20824 ns

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h | 1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c       | 4 ++++
 arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c    | 2 ++
 arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c      | 7 +++++++
 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h
index 0944218..f6d0694 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ struct stacktrace_ops {
 	/* On negative return stop dumping */
 	int (*stack)(void *data, char *name);
 	walk_stack_t	walk_stack;
+	int (*end_walk)(void *data);
 };
 
 void dump_trace(struct task_struct *tsk, struct pt_regs *regs,
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
index ef8017c..274d42a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
@@ -113,6 +113,8 @@ print_context_stack(struct task_struct *task,
 			print_ftrace_graph_addr(addr, data, ops, task, graph);
 		}
 		stack++;
+		if (ops->end_walk && ops->end_walk(data))
+			break;
 	}
 	return bp;
 }
@@ -138,6 +140,8 @@ print_context_stack_bp(struct task_struct *task,
 		frame = frame->next_frame;
 		ret_addr = &frame->return_address;
 		print_ftrace_graph_addr(addr, data, ops, task, graph);
+		if (ops->end_walk && ops->end_walk(data))
+			break;
 	}
 
 	return (unsigned long)frame;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c
index fef917e..762d1fd 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c
@@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ void dump_trace(struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs,
 
 		bp = ops->walk_stack(task, stack, bp, ops, data,
 				     end_stack, &graph);
+		if (ops->end_walk && ops->end_walk(data))
+			break;
 
 		/* Stop if not on irq stack */
 		if (!end_stack)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c
index 9ee98ee..a44de4d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c
@@ -47,10 +47,17 @@ save_stack_address_nosched(void *data, unsigned long addr, int reliable)
 	return __save_stack_address(data, addr, reliable, true);
 }
 
+static int save_stack_end(void *data)
+{
+	struct stack_trace *trace = data;
+	return trace->nr_entries >= trace->max_entries;
+}
+
 static const struct stacktrace_ops save_stack_ops = {
 	.stack		= save_stack_stack,
 	.address	= save_stack_address,
 	.walk_stack	= print_context_stack,
+	.end_walk	= save_stack_end,
 };
 
 static const struct stacktrace_ops save_stack_ops_nosched = {
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1539093 — [PATCH v4 12/15] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked lock

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 12/15] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked lock
Message-ID<sMlLc-7BJ-31@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1539088
lock_page() and its family can cause deadlock. Nevertheless, it cannot
use the lock correctness validator becasue unlock_page() can be called
in different context from the context calling lock_page(), which
violates lockdep's assumption without crossrelease feature.

However, thanks to CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE, we can apply the lockdep
detector to lock_page(). Applied it.

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 include/linux/mm_types.h |   9 +++++
 include/linux/pagemap.h  | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 lib/Kconfig.debug        |   8 ++++
 mm/filemap.c             |   4 +-
 mm/page_alloc.c          |   3 ++
 5 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/mm_types.h b/include/linux/mm_types.h
index ca3e517..87db0ac 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm_types.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm_types.h
@@ -16,6 +16,10 @@
 #include <asm/page.h>
 #include <asm/mmu.h>
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK
+#include <linux/lockdep.h>
+#endif
+
 #ifndef AT_VECTOR_SIZE_ARCH
 #define AT_VECTOR_SIZE_ARCH 0
 #endif
@@ -220,6 +224,11 @@ struct page {
 #ifdef LAST_CPUPID_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS
 	int _last_cpupid;
 #endif
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK
+	struct lockdep_map map;
+	struct cross_lock xlock;
+#endif
 }
 /*
  * The struct page can be forced to be double word aligned so that atomic ops
diff --git a/include/linux/pagemap.h b/include/linux/pagemap.h
index 0cf6980..dbe7adf 100644
--- a/include/linux/pagemap.h
+++ b/include/linux/pagemap.h
@@ -14,6 +14,9 @@
 #include <linux/bitops.h>
 #include <linux/hardirq.h> /* for in_interrupt() */
 #include <linux/hugetlb_inline.h>
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK
+#include <linux/lockdep.h>
+#endif
 
 /*
  * Bits in mapping->flags.  The lower __GFP_BITS_SHIFT bits are the page
@@ -413,26 +416,90 @@ static inline pgoff_t linear_page_index(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 	return pgoff;
 }
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK
+#define lock_page_init(p)					\
+do {								\
+	static struct lock_class_key __key;			\
+	lockdep_init_map_crosslock(&(p)->map, &(p)->xlock,	\
+			"(PG_locked)" #p, &__key, 0);		\
+} while (0)
+
+static inline void lock_page_acquire(struct page *page, int try)
+{
+	page = compound_head(page);
+	lock_acquire_exclusive(&page->map, 0, try, NULL, _RET_IP_);
+}
+
+static inline void lock_page_release(struct page *page)
+{
+	page = compound_head(page);
+	/*
+	 * lock_commit_crosslock() is necessary for crosslock
+	 * when the lock is released, before lock_release().
+	 */
+	lock_commit_crosslock(&page->map);
+	lock_release(&page->map, 0, _RET_IP_);
+}
+#else
+static inline void lock_page_init(struct page *page) {}
+static inline void lock_page_free(struct page *page) {}
+static inline void lock_page_acquire(struct page *page, int try) {}
+static inline void lock_page_release(struct page *page) {}
+#endif
+
 extern void __lock_page(struct page *page);
 extern int __lock_page_killable(struct page *page);
 extern int __lock_page_or_retry(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
 				unsigned int flags);
-extern void unlock_page(struct page *page);
+extern void do_raw_unlock_page(struct page *page);
 
-static inline int trylock_page(struct page *page)
+static inline void unlock_page(struct page *page)
+{
+	lock_page_release(page);
+	do_raw_unlock_page(page);
+}
+
+static inline int do_raw_trylock_page(struct page *page)
 {
 	page = compound_head(page);
 	return (likely(!test_and_set_bit_lock(PG_locked, &page->flags)));
 }
 
+static inline int trylock_page(struct page *page)
+{
+	if (do_raw_trylock_page(page)) {
+		lock_page_acquire(page, 1);
+		return 1;
+	}
+	return 0;
+}
+
 /*
  * lock_page may only be called if we have the page's inode pinned.
  */
 static inline void lock_page(struct page *page)
 {
 	might_sleep();
-	if (!trylock_page(page))
+
+	if (!do_raw_trylock_page(page))
 		__lock_page(page);
+	/*
+	 * Acquire() must be after actual lock operation of crosslock.
+	 * This way crosslock and other locks can be serialized like,
+	 *
+	 *	CONTEXT 1		CONTEXT 2
+	 *	LOCK crosslock
+	 *	ACQUIRE crosslock
+	 *	  atomic_inc_return
+	 *	~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+	 *				ACQUIRE lock1
+	 *				  atomic_read_acquire lock1
+	 *				LOCK lock1
+	 *				LOCK lock2
+	 *
+	 * so that 'crosslock -> lock1 -> lock2' can be seen globally.
+	 */
+	lock_page_acquire(page, 0);
 }
 
 /*
@@ -442,9 +509,20 @@ static inline void lock_page(struct page *page)
  */
 static inline int lock_page_killable(struct page *page)
 {
+	int ret;
+
 	might_sleep();
-	if (!trylock_page(page))
-		return __lock_page_killable(page);
+
+	if (!do_raw_trylock_page(page)) {
+		ret = __lock_page_killable(page);
+		if (ret)
+			return ret;
+	}
+	/*
+	 * Acquire() must be after actual lock operation of crosslock.
+	 * This way crosslock and other locks can be serialized.
+	 */
+	lock_page_acquire(page, 0);
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -459,7 +537,17 @@ static inline int lock_page_or_retry(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
 				     unsigned int flags)
 {
 	might_sleep();
-	return trylock_page(page) || __lock_page_or_retry(page, mm, flags);
+
+	if (do_raw_trylock_page(page) || __lock_page_or_retry(page, mm, flags)) {
+		/*
+		 * Acquire() must be after actual lock operation of crosslock.
+		 * This way crosslock and other locks can be serialized.
+		 */
+		lock_page_acquire(page, 0);
+		return 1;
+	}
+
+	return 0;
 }
 
 /*
diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
index 3466e57..1926435 100644
--- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
+++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
@@ -1048,6 +1048,14 @@ config LOCKDEP_COMPLETE
 	 A deadlock caused by wait_for_completion() and complete() can be
 	 detected by lockdep using crossrelease feature.
 
+config LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK
+	bool "Lock debugging: allow PG_locked lock to use deadlock detector"
+	select LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE
+	default n
+	help
+	 PG_locked lock is a kind of crosslock. Using crossrelease feature,
+	 PG_locked lock can participate in deadlock detector.
+
 config PROVE_LOCKING
 	bool "Lock debugging: prove locking correctness"
 	depends on DEBUG_KERNEL && TRACE_IRQFLAGS_SUPPORT && STACKTRACE_SUPPORT && LOCKDEP_SUPPORT
diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index 20f3b1f..e1f60fd 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -827,7 +827,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(add_page_wait_queue);
  * The mb is necessary to enforce ordering between the clear_bit and the read
  * of the waitqueue (to avoid SMP races with a parallel wait_on_page_locked()).
  */
-void unlock_page(struct page *page)
+void do_raw_unlock_page(struct page *page)
 {
 	page = compound_head(page);
 	VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(page), page);
@@ -835,7 +835,7 @@ void unlock_page(struct page *page)
 	smp_mb__after_atomic();
 	wake_up_page(page, PG_locked);
 }
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(unlock_page);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(do_raw_unlock_page);
 
 /**
  * end_page_writeback - end writeback against a page
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 8b3e134..0adc46c 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -5225,6 +5225,9 @@ not_early:
 		} else {
 			__init_single_pfn(pfn, zone, nid);
 		}
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK
+		lock_page_init(pfn_to_page(pfn));
+#endif
 	}
 }
 
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1539094 — [PATCH v4 08/15] lockdep: Make crossrelease use save_stack_trace_fast()

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:20 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 08/15] lockdep: Make crossrelease use save_stack_trace_fast()
Message-ID<sMlLc-7BJ-33@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1539088
Currently crossrelease feature uses save_stack_trace() to save
backtrace. However, it has much overhead. So this patch makes it
use save_stack_trace_norm() instead, which has smaller overhead.

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 2c8b2c1..fbd07ee 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -4768,7 +4768,7 @@ static void add_plock(struct held_lock *hlock, unsigned int prev_gen_id,
 		plock->trace.max_entries = MAX_PLOCK_TRACE_ENTRIES;
 		plock->trace.entries = plock->trace_entries;
 		plock->trace.skip = 3;
-		save_stack_trace(&plock->trace);
+		save_stack_trace_fast(&plock->trace);
 	}
 }
 
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1539097 — [PATCH v4 06/15] lockdep: Make save_trace can skip stack tracing of the current

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:30 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 06/15] lockdep: Make save_trace can skip stack tracing of the current
Message-ID<sMlUR-7HU-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1539088
Currently, save_trace() always performs save_stack_trace() for the
current. However, crossrelease needs to use stack trace data of another
context instead of the current. So add a parameter for skipping stack
tracing of the current and make it use trace data, which is already
saved by crossrelease framework.

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 3eaa11c..11580ec 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -387,15 +387,22 @@ static void print_lockdep_off(const char *bug_msg)
 #endif
 }
 
-static int save_trace(struct stack_trace *trace)
+static int save_trace(struct stack_trace *trace, int skip_tracing)
 {
-	trace->nr_entries = 0;
-	trace->max_entries = MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES - nr_stack_trace_entries;
-	trace->entries = stack_trace + nr_stack_trace_entries;
+	unsigned int nr_avail = MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES - nr_stack_trace_entries;
 
-	trace->skip = 3;
-
-	save_stack_trace(trace);
+	if (skip_tracing) {
+		trace->nr_entries = min(trace->nr_entries, nr_avail);
+		memcpy(stack_trace + nr_stack_trace_entries, trace->entries,
+				trace->nr_entries * sizeof(trace->entries[0]));
+		trace->entries = stack_trace + nr_stack_trace_entries;
+	} else {
+		trace->nr_entries = 0;
+		trace->max_entries = nr_avail;
+		trace->entries = stack_trace + nr_stack_trace_entries;
+		trace->skip = 3;
+		save_stack_trace(trace);
+	}
 
 	/*
 	 * Some daft arches put -1 at the end to indicate its a full trace.
@@ -1172,7 +1179,7 @@ static noinline int print_circular_bug(struct lock_list *this,
 	if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock() || debug_locks_silent)
 		return 0;
 
-	if (!save_trace(&this->trace))
+	if (!save_trace(&this->trace, 0))
 		return 0;
 
 	depth = get_lock_depth(target);
@@ -1518,13 +1525,13 @@ print_bad_irq_dependency(struct task_struct *curr,
 
 	printk("\nthe dependencies between %s-irq-safe lock", irqclass);
 	printk(" and the holding lock:\n");
-	if (!save_trace(&prev_root->trace))
+	if (!save_trace(&prev_root->trace, 0))
 		return 0;
 	print_shortest_lock_dependencies(backwards_entry, prev_root);
 
 	printk("\nthe dependencies between the lock to be acquired");
 	printk(" and %s-irq-unsafe lock:\n", irqclass);
-	if (!save_trace(&next_root->trace))
+	if (!save_trace(&next_root->trace, 0))
 		return 0;
 	print_shortest_lock_dependencies(forwards_entry, next_root);
 
@@ -1856,7 +1863,7 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
 	}
 
 	if (!own_trace && stack_saved && !*stack_saved) {
-		if (!save_trace(&trace))
+		if (!save_trace(&trace, 0))
 			return 0;
 		*stack_saved = 1;
 	}
@@ -2547,7 +2554,7 @@ print_irq_inversion_bug(struct task_struct *curr,
 	lockdep_print_held_locks(curr);
 
 	printk("\nthe shortest dependencies between 2nd lock and 1st lock:\n");
-	if (!save_trace(&root->trace))
+	if (!save_trace(&root->trace, 0))
 		return 0;
 	print_shortest_lock_dependencies(other, root);
 
@@ -3134,7 +3141,7 @@ static int mark_lock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
 
 	hlock_class(this)->usage_mask |= new_mask;
 
-	if (!save_trace(hlock_class(this)->usage_traces + new_bit))
+	if (!save_trace(hlock_class(this)->usage_traces + new_bit, 0))
 		return 0;
 
 	switch (new_bit) {
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1539098 — [PATCH v4 03/15] lockdep: Refactor lookup_chain_cache()

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:30 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 03/15] lockdep: Refactor lookup_chain_cache()
Message-ID<sMlUR-7HU-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1539088
Currently, lookup_chain_cache() provides both 'lookup' and 'add'
functionalities in a function. However, each one is useful. So this
patch makes lookup_chain_cache() only do lookup functionality and
makes add_chain_cahce() only do add functionality. And it's more
readable than these functionalities are mixed in a function.

Crossrelease feature also needs to use each one separately.

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 129 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 81f1a71..5df56aa 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -2105,15 +2105,9 @@ static int check_no_collision(struct task_struct *curr,
 	return 1;
 }
 
-/*
- * Look up a dependency chain. If the key is not present yet then
- * add it and return 1 - in this case the new dependency chain is
- * validated. If the key is already hashed, return 0.
- * (On return with 1 graph_lock is held.)
- */
-static inline int lookup_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr,
-				     struct held_lock *hlock,
-				     u64 chain_key)
+static inline int add_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr,
+				  struct held_lock *hlock,
+				  u64 chain_key)
 {
 	struct lock_class *class = hlock_class(hlock);
 	struct hlist_head *hash_head = chainhashentry(chain_key);
@@ -2121,49 +2115,18 @@ static inline int lookup_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr,
 	int i, j;
 
 	/*
+	 * Allocate a new chain entry from the static array, and add
+	 * it to the hash:
+	 */
+
+	/*
 	 * We might need to take the graph lock, ensure we've got IRQs
 	 * disabled to make this an IRQ-safe lock.. for recursion reasons
 	 * lockdep won't complain about its own locking errors.
 	 */
 	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()))
 		return 0;
-	/*
-	 * We can walk it lock-free, because entries only get added
-	 * to the hash:
-	 */
-	hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(chain, hash_head, entry) {
-		if (chain->chain_key == chain_key) {
-cache_hit:
-			debug_atomic_inc(chain_lookup_hits);
-			if (!check_no_collision(curr, hlock, chain))
-				return 0;
 
-			if (very_verbose(class))
-				printk("\nhash chain already cached, key: "
-					"%016Lx tail class: [%p] %s\n",
-					(unsigned long long)chain_key,
-					class->key, class->name);
-			return 0;
-		}
-	}
-	if (very_verbose(class))
-		printk("\nnew hash chain, key: %016Lx tail class: [%p] %s\n",
-			(unsigned long long)chain_key, class->key, class->name);
-	/*
-	 * Allocate a new chain entry from the static array, and add
-	 * it to the hash:
-	 */
-	if (!graph_lock())
-		return 0;
-	/*
-	 * We have to walk the chain again locked - to avoid duplicates:
-	 */
-	hlist_for_each_entry(chain, hash_head, entry) {
-		if (chain->chain_key == chain_key) {
-			graph_unlock();
-			goto cache_hit;
-		}
-	}
 	if (unlikely(nr_lock_chains >= MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS)) {
 		if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
 			return 0;
@@ -2215,6 +2178,75 @@ cache_hit:
 	return 1;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Look up a dependency chain.
+ */
+static inline struct lock_chain *lookup_chain_cache(u64 chain_key)
+{
+	struct hlist_head *hash_head = chainhashentry(chain_key);
+	struct lock_chain *chain;
+
+	/*
+	 * We can walk it lock-free, because entries only get added
+	 * to the hash:
+	 */
+	hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(chain, hash_head, entry) {
+		if (chain->chain_key == chain_key) {
+			debug_atomic_inc(chain_lookup_hits);
+			return chain;
+		}
+	}
+	return NULL;
+}
+
+/*
+ * If the key is not present yet in dependency chain cache then
+ * add it and return 1 - in this case the new dependency chain is
+ * validated. If the key is already hashed, return 0.
+ * (On return with 1 graph_lock is held.)
+ */
+static inline int lookup_chain_cache_add(struct task_struct *curr,
+					 struct held_lock *hlock,
+					 u64 chain_key)
+{
+	struct lock_class *class = hlock_class(hlock);
+	struct lock_chain *chain = lookup_chain_cache(chain_key);
+
+	if (chain) {
+cache_hit:
+		if (!check_no_collision(curr, hlock, chain))
+			return 0;
+
+		if (very_verbose(class))
+			printk("\nhash chain already cached, key: "
+					"%016Lx tail class: [%p] %s\n",
+					(unsigned long long)chain_key,
+					class->key, class->name);
+		return 0;
+	}
+
+	if (very_verbose(class))
+		printk("\nnew hash chain, key: %016Lx tail class: [%p] %s\n",
+			(unsigned long long)chain_key, class->key, class->name);
+
+	if (!graph_lock())
+		return 0;
+
+	/*
+	 * We have to walk the chain again locked - to avoid duplicates:
+	 */
+	chain = lookup_chain_cache(chain_key);
+	if (chain) {
+		graph_unlock();
+		goto cache_hit;
+	}
+
+	if (!add_chain_cache(curr, hlock, chain_key))
+		return 0;
+
+	return 1;
+}
+
 static int validate_chain(struct task_struct *curr, struct lockdep_map *lock,
 		struct held_lock *hlock, int chain_head, u64 chain_key)
 {
@@ -2225,11 +2257,11 @@ static int validate_chain(struct task_struct *curr, struct lockdep_map *lock,
 	 *
 	 * We look up the chain_key and do the O(N^2) check and update of
 	 * the dependencies only if this is a new dependency chain.
-	 * (If lookup_chain_cache() returns with 1 it acquires
+	 * (If lookup_chain_cache_add() return with 1 it acquires
 	 * graph_lock for us)
 	 */
 	if (!hlock->trylock && hlock->check &&
-	    lookup_chain_cache(curr, hlock, chain_key)) {
+	    lookup_chain_cache_add(curr, hlock, chain_key)) {
 		/*
 		 * Check whether last held lock:
 		 *
@@ -2260,9 +2292,10 @@ static int validate_chain(struct task_struct *curr, struct lockdep_map *lock,
 		if (!chain_head && ret != 2)
 			if (!check_prevs_add(curr, hlock))
 				return 0;
+
 		graph_unlock();
 	} else
-		/* after lookup_chain_cache(): */
+		/* after lookup_chain_cache_add(): */
 		if (unlikely(!debug_locks))
 			return 0;
 
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1539100 — [PATCH v4 04/15] lockdep: Add a function building a chain between two classes

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-12-09 06:30 +0100
Subject[PATCH v4 04/15] lockdep: Add a function building a chain between two classes
Message-ID<sMlUR-7HU-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1539088
add_chain_cache() should be used in the context where the hlock is
owned since it might be racy in another context. However crossrelease
feature needs to build a chain between two locks regardless of context.
So introduce a new function making it possible.

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 5df56aa..111839f 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -2105,6 +2105,62 @@ static int check_no_collision(struct task_struct *curr,
 	return 1;
 }
 
+/*
+ * This is for building a chain between just two different classes,
+ * instead of adding a new hlock upon current, which is done by
+ * add_chain_cache().
+ *
+ * This can be called in any context with two classes, while
+ * add_chain_cache() must be done within the lock owener's context
+ * since it uses hlock which might be racy in another context.
+ */
+static inline int add_chain_cache_classes(unsigned int prev,
+					  unsigned int next,
+					  unsigned int irq_context,
+					  u64 chain_key)
+{
+	struct hlist_head *hash_head = chainhashentry(chain_key);
+	struct lock_chain *chain;
+
+	/*
+	 * Allocate a new chain entry from the static array, and add
+	 * it to the hash:
+	 */
+
+	/*
+	 * We might need to take the graph lock, ensure we've got IRQs
+	 * disabled to make this an IRQ-safe lock.. for recursion reasons
+	 * lockdep won't complain about its own locking errors.
+	 */
+	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()))
+		return 0;
+
+	if (unlikely(nr_lock_chains >= MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS)) {
+		if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
+			return 0;
+
+		print_lockdep_off("BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS too low!");
+		dump_stack();
+		return 0;
+	}
+
+	chain = lock_chains + nr_lock_chains++;
+	chain->chain_key = chain_key;
+	chain->irq_context = irq_context;
+	chain->depth = 2;
+	if (likely(nr_chain_hlocks + chain->depth <= MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS)) {
+		chain->base = nr_chain_hlocks;
+		nr_chain_hlocks += chain->depth;
+		chain_hlocks[chain->base] = prev - 1;
+		chain_hlocks[chain->base + 1] = next -1;
+	}
+	hlist_add_head_rcu(&chain->entry, hash_head);
+	debug_atomic_inc(chain_lookup_misses);
+	inc_chains();
+
+	return 1;
+}
+
 static inline int add_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr,
 				  struct held_lock *hlock,
 				  u64 chain_key)
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web