Received: by 2002:a25:f815:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id u21csp2435690ybd; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:17:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyepE4TCGk/YL1k2lTX2aMH7dQDuLPgnBJ8T8oZ+D6J20FP9faQvlMH4J+CBdA+VKOwT8+I X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:26c:: with SMTP id 99mr6751378plc.215.1561663057409; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:17:37 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1561663057; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=gmNSm/qIf/BkEbUfETNPu2ir5/1qHPekNlkPR6BBwt6z1ibqt2b03Ow59aijN8vM06 InB2hxmuM0IdyYP7IcrL1lJD3OfAQD7Jc+LsleoTmrv/Ca4m9Khm9TdgiOiFvwYUYMLu h9Xj8EZ1bur492fvr4lVRobjVVQGKiq/AvDpoGU8Ec2KKwuOWfCc2+ryXYRCwuLEFHaY qa2tpnGqK6V3rD9ELWlhTpyBkeahSqy9XlCzSadClx5Tklbr5Y2dG4ofmf0tjF3Ty3yi ayshfpTzbbVZxygNB7f3H8eGnLdL3EXKqD7G99PYrDerBXoDjmCrPNXAp1mH5NuS4F23 NPEQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:date; bh=uFgqsqQA2NBZjhlJbRhjoVH2Z6zfxhsCI3rBSi+uRP0=; b=u1x0RpzbVtmG9iFzls3qt+1gTuhob6gsE9F8GKU8WINy4cW3oBojAS9YRbQpXXCQaO fWEk+3bIQXHsz0yYFdWlwHPpa0og9H17aeUkabBsbZkVBFYeIN3vK3dnNflVS5B2HcOh ODo9CRjm6kikinUBkAgGftcAa/DLXvm1KItDH+LmA1Va4qEHLaTyzfWdD8+iCcyuP1SN epV1W2pp1En0LzvQI8K6N5qN03rkbkfRadJst2Fv7anFUb0M6t6MDiZkz1bejMUyBAO5 p9tSRpGwOl5Ii/4eepCjrp5YxXWvZGqEraeEe56QZmjO04AxZO2KWpyjM9YdHbuC/JLs 4gDg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a2si2850602pgb.166.2019.06.27.12.17.20; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726571AbfF0TPf (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:15:35 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:42784 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726426AbfF0TPf (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:15:35 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5RJDC05007511 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:15:33 -0400 Received: from e14.ny.us.ibm.com (e14.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.204]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2td2fh3n6e-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:15:33 -0400 Received: from localhost by e14.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:15:32 +0100 Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.29) by e14.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.201) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:15:29 +0100 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x5RJFSf855443806 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 19:15:28 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF19BB206B; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 19:15:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1111B2064; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 19:15:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.70.82.26]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 19:15:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B480316C5D5C; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:15:30 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Joel Fernandes Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Steven Rostedt , rcu , LKML , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Josh Triplett , Mathieu Desnoyers , Lai Jiangshan Subject: Re: [RFC] Deadlock via recursive wakeup via RCU with threadirqs Reply-To: paulmck@linux.ibm.com References: <20190626162558.GY26519@linux.ibm.com> <20190627142436.GD215968@google.com> <20190627103455.01014276@gandalf.local.home> <20190627153031.GA249127@google.com> <20190627154011.vbje64x6auaknhx4@linutronix.de> <20190627181112.GY26519@linux.ibm.com> <20190627182722.GA216610@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190627182722.GA216610@google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19062719-0052-0000-0000-000003D70E18 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00011342; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000286; SDB=6.01224129; UDB=6.00644263; IPR=6.01005318; MB=3.00027493; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2019-06-27 19:15:32 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19062719-0053-0000-0000-0000617BC05E Message-Id: <20190627191530.GC26519@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-06-27_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906270219 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 02:27:22PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:11:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 01:46:27PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:43 PM Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:40 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 2019-06-27 11:37:10 [-0400], Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > > > > Sebastian it would be nice if possible to trace where the > > > > > > t->rcu_read_unlock_special is set for this scenario of calling > > > > > > rcu_read_unlock_special, to give a clear idea about whether it was > > > > > > really because of an IPI. I guess we could also add additional RCU > > > > > > debug fields to task_struct (just for debugging) to see where there > > > > > > unlock_special is set. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a test to reproduce this, or do I just boot an intel x86_64 > > > > > > machine with "threadirqs" and run into it? > > > > > > > > > > Do you want to send me a patch or should I send you my kvm image which > > > > > triggers the bug on boot? > > > > > > > > I could reproduce this as well just booting Linus tree with threadirqs > > > > command line and running rcutorture. In 15 seconds or so it locks > > > > up... gdb backtrace shows the recursive lock: > > > > > > Sorry that got badly wrapped, so I pasted it here: > > > https://hastebin.com/ajivofomik.shell > > > > Which rcutorture scenario would that be? TREE03 is thus far refusing > > to fail for me when run this way: > > > > $ tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/kvm.sh --cpus 8 --duration 5 --trust-make --configs "TREE03" --bootargs "threadirqs" > > I built x86_64_defconfig with CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled, then I ran it with > following boot params: > rcutorture.shutdown_secs=60 rcutorture.n_barrier_cbs=4 rcutree.kthread_prio=2 > > and also "threadirqs" > > This was not a TREE config, but just my simple RCU test using qemu. > > > I will try this diff and let you know. > > > If it had failed, I would have tried the patch shown below. I know that > > Sebastian has some concerns about the bug happening anyway, but we have > > to start somewhere! ;-) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > > index 82c925df1d92..be7bafc2c0a0 100644 > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > > @@ -624,25 +624,16 @@ static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t) > > (rdp->grpmask & rnp->expmask) || > > tick_nohz_full_cpu(rdp->cpu); > > // Need to defer quiescent state until everything is enabled. > > - if ((exp || in_irq()) && irqs_were_disabled && use_softirq && > > - (in_irq() || !t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.deferred_qs)) { > > - // Using softirq, safe to awaken, and we get > > - // no help from enabling irqs, unlike bh/preempt. > > - raise_softirq_irqoff(RCU_SOFTIRQ); > > - } else { > > - // Enabling BH or preempt does reschedule, so... > > - // Also if no expediting or NO_HZ_FULL, slow is OK. > > - set_tsk_need_resched(current); > > - set_preempt_need_resched(); > > - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IRQ_WORK) && irqs_were_disabled && > > - !rdp->defer_qs_iw_pending && exp) { > > - // Get scheduler to re-evaluate and call hooks. > > - // If !IRQ_WORK, FQS scan will eventually IPI. > > - init_irq_work(&rdp->defer_qs_iw, > > - rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_handler); > > - rdp->defer_qs_iw_pending = true; > > - irq_work_queue_on(&rdp->defer_qs_iw, rdp->cpu); > > - } > > + set_tsk_need_resched(current); > > + set_preempt_need_resched(); > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IRQ_WORK) && irqs_were_disabled && > > + !rdp->defer_qs_iw_pending && exp) { > > + // Get scheduler to re-evaluate and call hooks. > > + // If !IRQ_WORK, FQS scan will eventually IPI. > > + init_irq_work(&rdp->defer_qs_iw, > > + rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_handler); > > + rdp->defer_qs_iw_pending = true; > > + irq_work_queue_on(&rdp->defer_qs_iw, rdp->cpu); > > Nice to see the code here got simplified ;-) Assuming that it still works... But it also looks to be unnecessary, at least in brief testing. I will of course be adding a threadirqs to TREE03.boot. :-/ Thanx, Paul