- Oct 07, 2021
-
-
André Almeida authored
Test if the futex_waitv timeout is working as expected, using the supported clockid options. Signed-off-by:
André Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com> Signed-off-by:
Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210923171111.300673-21-andrealmeid@collabora.com
-
André Almeida authored
Create a new file to test the waitv mechanism. Test both private and shared futexes. Wake the last futex in the array, and check if the return value from futex_waitv() is the right index. Signed-off-by:
-
André Almeida authored
Wire up syscall entry point for ARM architectures, for both 32 and 64-bit. Signed-off-by:
-
André Almeida authored
Wire up syscall entry point for x86 arch, for both i386 and x86_64. Signed-off-by:
-
André Almeida authored
Add support to wait on multiple futexes. This is the interface implemented by this syscall: futex_waitv(struct futex_waitv *waiters, unsigned int nr_futexes, unsigned int flags, struct timespec *timeout, clockid_t clockid) struct futex_waitv { __u64 val; __u64 uaddr; __u32 flags; __u32 __reserved; }; Given an array of struct futex_waitv, wait on each uaddr. The thread wakes if a futex_wake() is performed at any uaddr. The syscall returns immediately if any waiter has *uaddr != val. *timeout is an optional absolute timeout value for the operation. This syscall supports only 64bit sized timeout structs. The flags argument of the syscall should be empty, but it can be used for future extensions. Flags for shared futexes, sizes, etc. should be used on the individual flags of each waiter. __reserved is used for explicit padding and should be 0, but it might be used for future extensions. If the userspace uses 32-bit pointers, it should make sure to explicitly cast it when assigning to waitv::uaddr. Returns the array index of one of the woken futexes. There’s no given information of how many were woken, or any particular attribute of it (if it’s the first woken, if it is of the smaller index...). Signed-off-by: -
Peter Zijlstra authored
We need to make sure that all requeue operations take the hash bucket locks in the same order to avoid deadlock. Simplify the current double_lock_hb implementation by making sure hb1 is always the "smallest" bucket to avoid extra checks. [André: Add commit description] Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
Move the wait/wake bits into their own file. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
Move all the requeue bits into their own file. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename: s/mark_wake_futex/futex_wake_mark/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename: s/match_futex/futex_match/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename them: s/hb_waiters_/futex_&/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
Move the PI futex implementation into it's own file. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename them: s/\<\([^_ ]*\)_futex_value_locked/futex_\1_value_locked/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename: s/hash_futex/futex_hash/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename: s/__unqueue_futex/__futex_unqueue/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename them: s/queue_\(un\)*lock/futex_q_\1lock/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename them: s/futex_wait_queue_me/futex_wait_queue/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In order to prepare introducing these symbols into the global namespace; rename them: s/\<\(__\)*\(un\)*queue_me/\1futex_\2queue/g Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
Put the syscalls in their own little file. Signed-off-by:
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
In preparation for splitup.. Signed-off-by:
-
Davidlohr Bueso authored
Instead of a full barrier around the Rmw insn, micro-optimize for weakly ordered archs such that we only provide the required ACQUIRE semantics when taking the read lock. Signed-off-by:
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de> Signed-off-by:
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210920052031.54220-2-dave@stgolabs.net
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
Pull in dependencies.
-
- Oct 01, 2021
-
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
The rw_semaphore and rwlock_t implementation both wake the waiter while holding the rt_mutex_base::wait_lock acquired. This can be optimized by waking the waiter lockless outside of the locked section to avoid a needless contention on the rt_mutex_base::wait_lock lock. Extend rt_mutex_wake_q_add() to also accept task and state and use it in __rwbase_read_unlock(). Suggested-by:
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> Signed-off-by:
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by:
-
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior authored
rt_mutex_wake_q_add() needs to need to distiguish between sleeping locks (TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT) and normal locks which use TASK_NORMAL to use the proper wake mechanism. Instead of checking for != TASK_NORMAL make it more robust and check explicit for TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT which is the reason why a different wake mechanism is used. No functional change. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
The general rule that rcu_read_lock() held sections cannot voluntary sleep does apply even on RT kernels. Though the substitution of spin/rw locks on RT enabled kernels has to be exempt from that rule. On !RT a spin_lock() can obviously nest inside a RCU read side critical section as the lock acquisition is not going to block, but on RT this is not longer the case due to the 'sleeping' spinlock substitution. The RT patches contained a cheap hack to ignore the RCU nesting depth in might_sleep() checks, which was a pragmatic but incorrect workaround. Instead of generally ignoring the RCU nesting depth in __might_sleep() and __might_resched() checks, pass the rcu_preempt_depth() via the offsets argument to __might_resched() from spin/read/write_lock() which makes the checks work correctly even in RCU read side critical sections. The actual blocking on such a substituted lock within a RCU read side critical section is already handled correctly in __schedule() by treating it as a "preemption" of the RCU read side critical section. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
The __might_resched() checks in the cond_resched_lock() variants use PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET for preempt count offset checking which takes the preemption disable by the spin_lock() which is still held at that point into account. On PREEMPT_RT enabled kernels spin/rw_lock held sections stay preemptible which means PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET is 0, but that still triggers the __might_resched() check because that takes RCU read side nesting into account. On RT enabled kernels spin/read/write_lock() issue rcu_read_lock() to resemble the !RT semantics, which means in cond_resched_lock() the might resched check will see preempt_count() == 0 and rcu_preempt_depth() == 1. Introduce PREEMPT_LOCK_SCHED_OFFSET for those might resched checks and map them depending on CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
For !RT kernels RCU nest depth in __might_resched() is always expected to be 0, but on RT kernels it can be non zero while the preempt count is expected to be always 0. Instead of playing magic games in interpreting the 'preempt_offset' argument, rename it to 'offsets' and use the lower 8 bits for the expected preempt count, allow to hand in the expected RCU nest depth in the upper bits and adopt the __might_resched() code and related checks and printks. The affected call sites are updated in subsequent steps. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
might_sleep() output is pretty informative, but can be confusing at times especially with PREEMPT_RCU when the check triggers due to a voluntary sleep inside a RCU read side critical section: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/test.c:110 in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 415, name: kworker/u112:52 Preemption disabled at: migrate_disable+0x33/0xa0 in_atomic() is 0, but it still tells that preemption was disabled at migrate_disable(), which is completely useless because preemption is not disabled. But the interesting information to decode the above, i.e. the RCU nesting depth, is not printed. That becomes even more confusing when might_sleep() is invoked from cond_resched_lock() within a RCU read side critical section. Here the expected preemption count is 1 and not 0. BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/test.c:131 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 415, name: kworker/u112:52 Preemption disabled at: test_cond_lock+0xf3/0x1c0 So in_atomic() is set, which is expected as the caller holds a spinlock, but it's unclear why this is broken and the preempt disable IP is just pointing at the correct place, i.e. spin_lock(), which is obviously not helpful either. Make that more useful in general: - Print preempt_count() and the expected value and for the CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU case: - Print the RCU read side critical section nesting depth - Print the preempt disable IP only when preempt count does not have the expected value. So the might_sleep() dump from a within a preemptible RCU read side critical section becomes: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/test.c:110 in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 415, name: kworker/u112:52 preempt_count: 0, expected: 0 RCU nest depth: 1, expected: 0 and the cond_resched_lock() case becomes: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/test.c:141 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 415, name: kworker/u112:52 preempt_count: 1, expected: 1 RCU nest depth: 1, expected: 0 which makes is pretty obvious what's going on. For all other cases the preempt disable IP is still printed as before: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/test.c: 156 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 1, name: swapper/0 preempt_count: 1, expected: 0 RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0 Preemption disabled at: [<ffffffff82b48326>] test_might_sleep+0xbe/0xf8 BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/test.c: 163 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 1, name: swapper/0 preempt_count: 1, expected: 0 RCU nest depth: 1, expected: 0 Preemption disabled at: [<ffffffff82b48326>] test_might_sleep+0x1e4/0x280 This also prepares to provide a better debugging output for RT enabled kernels and their spinlock substitutions. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
Convert them to pr_*(). No functional change. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
All callers hand in 0 and never will hand in anything else. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
Commit 3427445a ("sched: Exclude cond_resched() from nested sleep test") removed the task state check of __might_sleep() for cond_resched_lock() because cond_resched_lock() is not a voluntary scheduling point which blocks. It's a preemption point which requires the lock holder to release the spin lock. The same rationale applies to cond_resched_rwlock_read/write(), but those were not touched. Make it consistent and use the non-state checking __might_resched() there as well. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Gleixner authored
__might_sleep() vs. ___might_sleep() is hard to distinguish. Aside of that the three underscore variant is exposed to provide a checkpoint for rescheduling points which are distinct from blocking points. They are semantically a preemption point which means that scheduling is state preserving. A real blocking operation, e.g. mutex_lock(), wait*(), which cannot preserve a task state which is not equal to RUNNING. While technically blocking on a "sleeping" spinlock in RT enabled kernels falls into the voluntary scheduling category because it has to wait until the contended spin/rw lock becomes available, the RT lock substitution code can semantically be mapped to a voluntary preemption because the RT lock substitution code and the scheduler are providing mechanisms to preserve the task state and to take regular non-lock related wakeups into account. Rename ___might_sleep() to __might_resched() to make the distinction of these functions clear. Signed-off-by:
-
Nathan Chancellor authored
Clang warns: kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c:138:7: error: variable 'ret' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is true [-Werror,-Wsometimes-uninitialized] if (!ww_mutex_trylock(&mutex, &ctx)) { ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c:172:9: note: uninitialized use occurs here return ret; ^~~ kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c:138:3: note: remove the 'if' if its condition is always false if (!ww_mutex_trylock(&mutex, &ctx)) { ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c:125:9: note: initialize the variable 'ret' to silence this warning int ret; ^ = 0 1 error generated. Assign !ww_mutex_trylock(...) to ret so that it is always initialized. Fixes: 12235da8 ("kernel/locking: Add context to ww_mutex_trylock()") Reported-by:"kernelci.org bot" <bot@kernelci.org> Reported-by:
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Signed-off-by:
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> Signed-off-by:
-
- Sep 17, 2021
-
-
Shaokun Zhang authored
'struct task_struct' has been decleared twice, so keep the top one and cleanup the repeated one. Signed-off-by:
Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com> Signed-off-by:
-
Zhouyi Zhou authored
Comments in wait-type checks be improved by mentioning the PREEPT_RT kernel configure option. Signed-off-by:
Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@gmail.com> Signed-off-by:
Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210811025920.20751-1-zhouzhouyi@gmail.com
-
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior authored
lock_is_held_type(, 1) detects acquired read locks. It only recognized locks acquired with lock_acquire_shared(). Read locks acquired with lock_acquire_shared_recursive() are not recognized because a `2' is stored as the read value. Rework the check to additionally recognise lock's read value one and two as a read held lock. Fixes: e9181886 ("locking: More accurate annotations for read_lock()") Signed-off-by:
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> Acked-by:
-
Maarten Lankhorst authored
i915 will soon gain an eviction path that trylock a whole lot of locks for eviction, getting dmesg failures like below: BUG: MAX_LOCK_DEPTH too low! turning off the locking correctness validator. depth: 48 max: 48! 48 locks held by i915_selftest/5776: #0: ffff888101a79240 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: __driver_attach+0x88/0x160 #1: ffffc900009778c0 (reservation_ww_class_acquire){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: i915_vma_pin.constprop.63+0x39/0x1b0 [i915] #2: ffff88800cf74de8 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_vma_pin.constprop.63+0x5f/0x1b0 [i915] #3: ffff88810c7f9e38 (&vm->mutex/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_vma_pin_ww+0x1c4/0x9d0 [i915] #4: ffff88810bad5768 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915] #5: ffff88810bad60e8 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915] ... #46: ffff88811964d768 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915] #47: ffff88811964e0e8 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915] INFO: lockdep is turned off. Fixing eviction to nest into ww_class_acquire is a high priority, but it requires a rework of the entire driver, which can only be done one step at a time. As an intermediate solution, add an acquire context to ww_mutex_trylock, which allows us to do proper nesting annotations on the trylocks, making the above lockdep splat disappear. This is also useful in regulator_lock_nested, which may avoid dropping regulator_nesting_mutex in the uncontended path, so use it there. TTM may be another user for this, where we could lock a buffer in a fastpath with list locks held, without dropping all locks we hold. [peterz: rework actual ww_mutex_trylock() implementations] Signed-off-by:Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by:
-
- Sep 15, 2021
-
-
Boqun Feng authored
Readers of rwbase can lock and unlock without taking any inner lock, if that happens, we need the ordering provided by atomic operations to satisfy the ordering semantics of lock/unlock. Without that, considering the follow case: { X = 0 initially } CPU 0 CPU 1 ===== ===== rt_write_lock(); X = 1 rt_write_unlock(): atomic_add(READER_BIAS - WRITER_BIAS, ->readers); // ->readers is READER_BIAS. rt_read_lock(): if ((r = atomic_read(->readers)) < 0) // True atomic_try_cmpxchg(->readers, r, r + 1); // succeed. <acquire the read lock via fast path> r1 = X; // r1 may be 0, because nothing prevent the reordering // of "X=1" and atomic_add() on CPU 1. Therefore audit every usage of atomic operations that may happen in a fast path, and add necessary barriers. Signed-off-by: -
Peter Zijlstra authored
The code in rwbase_write_lock() is a little non-obvious vs the read+set 'trylock', extract the sequence into a helper function to clarify the code. This also provides a single site to fix fast-path ordering. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Zijlstra authored
Noticed while looking at the readers race. Signed-off-by:
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210909110203.828203010@infradead.org
-
