user/sven/linux.git/kernel/locking, branch v3.18.109

locking/lockdep: Add nest_lock integrity test

2017-10-21T15:07:25Z

[ Upstream commit 7fb4a2cea6b18dab56d609530d077f168169ed6b ] Boqun reported that hlock->references can overflow. Add a debug test for that to generate a clear error when this happens. Without this, lockdep is likely to report a mysterious failure on unlock. Reported-by: Boqun Feng Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Chris Wilson Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Nicolai Hähnle Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

locktorture: Fix potential memory leak with rw lock test

2017-09-13T21:03:47Z

commit f4dbba591945dc301c302672adefba9e2ec08dc5 upstream. When running locktorture module with the below commands with kmemleak enabled: $ modprobe locktorture torture_type=rw_lock_irq $ rmmod locktorture The below kmemleak got caught: root@10:~# echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak [ 323.197029] kmemleak: 2 new suspected memory leaks (see /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak) root@10:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak unreferenced object 0xffffffc07592d500 (size 128): comm "modprobe", pid 368, jiffies 4294924118 (age 205.824s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c3 7b 02 00 00 00 00 00 .........{...... 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 d7 9b 02 00 00 00 00 00 ................ backtrace: [] create_object+0x110/0x288 [] kmemleak_alloc+0x58/0xa0 [] __kmalloc+0x234/0x318 [] 0xffffff80006fa130 [] do_one_initcall+0x44/0x138 [] do_init_module+0x68/0x1cc [] load_module+0x1a68/0x22e0 [] SyS_finit_module+0xe0/0xf0 [] el0_svc_naked+0x24/0x28 [] 0xffffffffffffffff unreferenced object 0xffffffc07592d480 (size 128): comm "modprobe", pid 368, jiffies 4294924118 (age 205.824s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 3b 6f 01 00 00 00 00 00 ........;o...... 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 23 6a 01 00 00 00 00 00 ........#j...... backtrace: [] create_object+0x110/0x288 [] kmemleak_alloc+0x58/0xa0 [] __kmalloc+0x234/0x318 [] 0xffffff80006fa22c [] do_one_initcall+0x44/0x138 [] do_init_module+0x68/0x1cc [] load_module+0x1a68/0x22e0 [] SyS_finit_module+0xe0/0xf0 [] el0_svc_naked+0x24/0x28 [] 0xffffffffffffffff It is because cxt.lwsa and cxt.lrsa don't get freed in module_exit, so free them in lock_torture_cleanup() and free writer_tasks if reader_tasks is failed at memory allocation. Signed-off-by: Yang Shi Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett Cc: 石洋 Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

locking/ww_mutex: Report recursive ww_mutex locking early

2016-06-20T03:47:43Z

[ Upstream commit 0422e83d84ae24b933e4b0d4c1e0f0b4ae8a0a3b ] Recursive locking for ww_mutexes was originally conceived as an exception. However, it is heavily used by the DRM atomic modesetting code. Currently, the recursive deadlock is checked after we have queued up for a busy-spin and as we never release the lock, we spin until kicked, whereupon the deadlock is discovered and reported. A simple solution for the now common problem is to move the recursive deadlock discovery to the first action when taking the ww_mutex. Suggested-by: Maarten Lankhorst Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1464293297-19777-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

sched: Handle priority boosted tasks proper in setscheduler()

2015-06-10T17:42:31Z

[ Upstream commit 0782e63bc6fe7e2d3408d250df11d388b7799c6b ] Ronny reported that the following scenario is not handled correctly: T1 (prio = 10) lock(rtmutex); T2 (prio = 20) lock(rtmutex) boost T1 T1 (prio = 20) sys_set_scheduler(prio = 30) T1 prio = 30 .... sys_set_scheduler(prio = 10) T1 prio = 30 The last step is wrong as T1 should now be back at prio 20. Commit c365c292d059 ("sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()") only handles the case where a boosted tasks tries to lower its priority. Fix it by taking the new effective priority into account for the decision whether a change of the priority is required. Reported-by: Ronny Meeus Tested-by: Steven Rostedt Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt Cc: Cc: Borislav Petkov Cc: H. Peter Anvin Cc: Mike Galbraith Fixes: c365c292d059 ("sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()") Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.DEB.2.11.1505051806060.4225@nanos Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

locking/rtmutex: Avoid a NULL pointer dereference on deadlock

2015-03-24T01:02:44Z

commit 8d1e5a1a1ccf5ae9d8a5a0ee7960202ccb0c5429 upstream. With task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() returning early -EDEADLK we never add the waiter to the waitqueue. Later, we try to remove it via remove_waiter() and go boom in rt_mutex_top_waiter() because rb_entry() gives a NULL pointer. ( Tested on v3.18-RT where rtmutex is used for regular mutex and I tried to get one twice in a row. ) Not sure when this started but I guess 397335f004f4 ("rtmutex: Fix deadlock detector for real") or commit 3d5c9340d194 ("rtmutex: Handle deadlock detection smarter"). Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1424187823-19600-1-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

Merge branch 'locking-core-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip

2014-10-13T13:51:40Z

Pull core locking updates from Ingo Molnar: "The main updates in this cycle were: - mutex MCS refactoring finishing touches: improve comments, refactor and clean up code, reduce debug data structure footprint, etc. - qrwlock finishing touches: remove old code, self-test updates. - small rwsem optimization - various smaller fixes/cleanups" * 'locking-core-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: locking/lockdep: Revert qrwlock recusive stuff locking/rwsem: Avoid double checking before try acquiring write lock locking/rwsem: Move EXPORT_SYMBOL() lines to follow function definition locking/rwlock, x86: Delete unused asm/rwlock.h and rwlock.S locking/rwlock, x86: Clean up asm/spinlock*.h to remove old rwlock code locking/semaphore: Resolve some shadow warnings locking/selftest: Support queued rwlock locking/lockdep: Restrict the use of recursive read_lock() with qrwlock locking/spinlocks: Always evaluate the second argument of spin_lock_nested() locking/Documentation: Update locking/mutex-design.txt disadvantages locking/Documentation: Move locking related docs into Documentation/locking/ locking/mutexes: Use MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER when appropriate locking/mutexes: Refactor optimistic spinning code locking/mcs: Remove obsolete comment locking/mutexes: Document quick lock release when unlocking locking/mutexes: Standardize arguments in lock/unlock slowpaths locking: Remove deprecated smp_mb__() barriers

locking/lockdep: Revert qrwlock recusive stuff

2014-10-03T04:09:30Z

Commit f0bab73cb539 ("locking/lockdep: Restrict the use of recursive read_lock() with qrwlock") changed lockdep to try and conform to the qrwlock semantics which differ from the traditional rwlock semantics. In particular qrwlock is fair outside of interrupt context, but in interrupt context readers will ignore all fairness. The problem modeling this is that read and write side have different lock state (interrupts) semantics but we only have a single representation of these. Therefore lockdep will get confused, thinking the lock can cause interrupt lock inversions. So revert it for now; the old rwlock semantics were already imperfectly modeled and the qrwlock extra won't fit either. If we want to properly fix this, I think we need to resurrect the work by Gautham did a few years ago that split the read and write state of locks: http://lwn.net/Articles/332801/ FWIW the locking selftest that would've failed (and was reported by Borislav earlier) is something like: RL(X1); /* IRQ-ON */ LOCK(A); UNLOCK(A); RU(X1); IRQ_ENTER(); RL(X1); /* IN-IRQ */ RU(X1); IRQ_EXIT(); At which point it would report that because A is an IRQ-unsafe lock we can suffer the following inversion: CPU0 CPU1 lock(A) lock(X1) lock(A) lock(X1) And this is 'wrong' because X1 can recurse (assuming the above lock are in fact read-lock) but lockdep doesn't know about this. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Waiman Long Cc: ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: bp@alien8.de Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Paul E. McKenney Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140930132600.GA7444@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

locking/rwsem: Avoid double checking before try acquiring write lock

2014-10-03T04:09:29Z

Commit 9b0fc9c09f1b ("rwsem: skip initial trylock in rwsem_down_write_failed") checks for if there are known active lockers in order to avoid write trylocking using expensive cmpxchg() when it likely wouldn't get the lock. However, a subsequent patch was added such that we directly check for sem->count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS right before trying that cmpxchg(). Thus, commit 9b0fc9c09f1b now just adds overhead. This patch modifies it so that we only do a check for if count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS. Also, add a comment on why we do an "extra check" of count before the cmpxchg(). Signed-off-by: Jason Low Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Aswin Chandramouleeswaran Cc: Chegu Vinod Cc: Peter Hurley Cc: Tim Chen Cc: Linus Torvalds Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1410913017.2447.22.camel@j-VirtualBox Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

locktorture: Cleanup header usage

2014-09-30T07:10:02Z

Remove some unnecessary ones and explicitly include rwsem.h Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney

locktorture: Cannot hold read and write lock

2014-09-30T07:10:02Z

... trigger an error if so. Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney