user/sven/linux.git/kernel/locking, branch v5.6.15

locktorture: Print ratio of acquisitions, not failures

2020-04-23T08:38:24Z

commit 80c503e0e68fbe271680ab48f0fe29bc034b01b7 upstream. The __torture_print_stats() function in locktorture.c carefully initializes local variable "min" to statp[0].n_lock_acquired, but then compares it to statp[i].n_lock_fail. Given that the .n_lock_fail field should normally be zero, and given the initialization, it seems reasonable to display the maximum and minimum number acquisitions instead of miscomputing the maximum and minimum number of failures. This commit therefore switches from failures to acquisitions. And this turns out to be not only a day-zero bug, but entirely my own fault. I hate it when that happens! Fixes: 0af3fe1efa53 ("locktorture: Add a lock-torture kernel module") Reported-by: Will Deacon Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Acked-by: Will Deacon Cc: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: Josh Triplett Cc: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

locking/lockdep: Avoid recursion in lockdep_count_{for,back}ward_deps()

2020-04-17T14:13:23Z

[ Upstream commit 25016bd7f4caf5fc983bbab7403d08e64cba3004 ] Qian Cai reported a bug when PROVE_RCU_LIST=y, and read on /proc/lockdep triggered a warning: [ ] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(current->hardirqs_enabled) ... [ ] Call Trace: [ ] lock_is_held_type+0x5d/0x150 [ ] ? rcu_lockdep_current_cpu_online+0x64/0x80 [ ] rcu_read_lock_any_held+0xac/0x100 [ ] ? rcu_read_lock_held+0xc0/0xc0 [ ] ? __slab_free+0x421/0x540 [ ] ? kasan_kmalloc+0x9/0x10 [ ] ? __kmalloc_node+0x1d7/0x320 [ ] ? kvmalloc_node+0x6f/0x80 [ ] __bfs+0x28a/0x3c0 [ ] ? class_equal+0x30/0x30 [ ] lockdep_count_forward_deps+0x11a/0x1a0 The warning got triggered because lockdep_count_forward_deps() call __bfs() without current->lockdep_recursion being set, as a result a lockdep internal function (__bfs()) is checked by lockdep, which is unexpected, and the inconsistency between the irq-off state and the state traced by lockdep caused the warning. Apart from this warning, lockdep internal functions like __bfs() should always be protected by current->lockdep_recursion to avoid potential deadlocks and data inconsistency, therefore add the current->lockdep_recursion on-and-off section to protect __bfs() in both lockdep_count_forward_deps() and lockdep_count_backward_deps() Reported-by: Qian Cai Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200312151258.128036-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

proc: convert everything to "struct proc_ops"

2020-02-04T03:05:26Z

The most notable change is DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE macro split in seq_file.h. Conversion rule is: llseek => proc_lseek unlocked_ioctl => proc_ioctl xxx => proc_xxx delete ".owner = THIS_MODULE" line [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix drivers/isdn/capi/kcapi_proc.c] [sfr@canb.auug.org.au: fix kernel/sched/psi.c] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200122180545.36222f50@canb.auug.org.au Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191225172546.GB13378@avx2 Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

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

2020-01-28T17:33:25Z

Pull locking updates from Ingo Molnar: "Just a handful of changes in this cycle: an ARM64 performance optimization, a comment fix and a debug output fix" * 'locking-core-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for arm64 locking/qspinlock: Fix inaccessible URL of MCS lock paper locking/lockdep: Fix lockdep_stats indentation problem

locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for arm64

2020-01-17T09:19:30Z

Arm64 has a more optimized spinning loop (atomic_cond_read_acquire) using wfe for spinlock that can boost performance of sibling threads by putting the current cpu to a wait state that is broken only when the monitored variable changes or an external event happens. OSQ has a more complicated spinning loop. Besides the lock value, it also checks for need_resched() and vcpu_is_preempted(). The check for need_resched() is not a problem as it is only set by the tick interrupt handler. That will be detected by the spinning cpu right after iret. The vcpu_is_preempted() check, however, is a problem as changes to the preempt state of of previous node will not affect the wait state. For ARM64, vcpu_is_preempted is not currently defined and so is a no-op. Will has indicated that he is planning to para-virtualize wfe instead of defining vcpu_is_preempted for PV support. So just add a comment in arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h to indicate that vcpu_is_preempted() should not be defined as suggested. On a 2-socket 56-core 224-thread ARM64 system, a kernel mutex locking microbenchmark was run for 10s with and without the patch. The performance numbers before patch were: Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1] Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 316/123,143/2,121,269 Threads = 224, Total Rate = 2,757 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 12 kop/s After patch, the numbers were: Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1] Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 334/147,836/1,304,787 Threads = 224, Total Rate = 3,311 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 15 kop/s So there was about 20% performance improvement. Signed-off-by: Waiman Long Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Acked-by: Will Deacon Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200113150735.21956-1-longman@redhat.com

locking/qspinlock: Fix inaccessible URL of MCS lock paper

2020-01-17T09:19:30Z

It turns out that the URL of the MCS lock paper listed in the source code is no longer accessible. I did got question about where the paper was. This patch updates the URL to BZ 206115 which contains a copy of the paper from https://www.cs.rochester.edu/u/scott/papers/1991_TOCS_synch.pdf Signed-off-by: Waiman Long Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Acked-by: Will Deacon Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200107174914.4187-1-longman@redhat.com

locking/lockdep: Fix lockdep_stats indentation problem

2020-01-17T09:19:30Z

It was found that two lines in the output of /proc/lockdep_stats have indentation problem: # cat /proc/lockdep_stats : in-process chains: 25057 stack-trace entries: 137827 [max: 524288] number of stack traces: 7973 number of stack hash chains: 6355 combined max dependencies: 1356414598 hardirq-safe locks: 57 hardirq-unsafe locks: 1286 : All the numbers displayed in /proc/lockdep_stats except the two stack trace numbers are formatted with a field with of 11. To properly align all the numbers, a field width of 11 is now added to the two stack trace numbers. Fixes: 8c779229d0f4 ("locking/lockdep: Report more stack trace statistics") Signed-off-by: Waiman Long Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191211213139.29934-1-longman@redhat.com

locking/rwsem: Fix kernel crash when spinning on RWSEM_OWNER_UNKNOWN

2020-01-17T09:19:27Z

The commit 91d2a812dfb9 ("locking/rwsem: Make handoff writer optimistically spin on owner") will allow a recently woken up waiting writer to spin on the owner. Unfortunately, if the owner happens to be RWSEM_OWNER_UNKNOWN, the code will incorrectly spin on it leading to a kernel crash. This is fixed by passing the proper non-spinnable bits to rwsem_spin_on_owner() so that RWSEM_OWNER_UNKNOWN will be treated as a non-spinnable target. Fixes: 91d2a812dfb9 ("locking/rwsem: Make handoff writer optimistically spin on owner") Reported-by: Christoph Hellwig Signed-off-by: Waiman Long Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Tested-by: Christoph Hellwig Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200115154336.8679-1-longman@redhat.com

locking/lockdep: Fix buffer overrun problem in stack_trace[]

2019-12-25T09:42:32Z

If the lockdep code is really running out of the stack_trace entries, it is likely that buffer overrun can happen and the data immediately after stack_trace[] will be corrupted. If there is less than LOCK_TRACE_SIZE_IN_LONGS entries left before the call to save_trace(), the max_entries computation will leave it with a very large positive number because of its unsigned nature. The subsequent call to stack_trace_save() will then corrupt the data after stack_trace[]. Fix that by changing max_entries to a signed integer and check for negative value before calling stack_trace_save(). Signed-off-by: Waiman Long Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Fixes: 12593b7467f9 ("locking/lockdep: Reduce space occupied by stack traces") Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191220135128.14876-1-longman@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

Revert "locking/mutex: Complain upon mutex API misuse in IRQ contexts"

2019-12-10T23:27:43Z

This ended up causing some noise in places such as rxrpc running in softirq. The warning is misleading in this case as the mutex trylock and unlock operations are done within the same context; and therefore we need not worry about the PI-boosting issues that comes along with no single-owner lock guarantees. While we don't want to support this in mutexes, there is no way out of this yet; so lets get rid of the WARNs for now, as it is only fair to code that has historically relied on non-preemptible softirq guarantees. In addition, changing the lock type is also unviable: exclusive rwsems have the same issue (just not the WARN_ON) and counting semaphores would introduce a performance hit as mutexes are a lot more optimized. This reverts: a0855d24fc22: ("locking/mutex: Complain upon mutex API misuse in IRQ contexts") Fixes: a0855d24fc22: ("locking/mutex: Complain upon mutex API misuse in IRQ contexts") Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso Tested-by: David Howells Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-afs@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Cc: will@kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191210220523.28540-1-dave@stgolabs.net Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar