From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [btrfs/rt] lockdep false positive
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 09:46:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1485074793.4467.49.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
Greetings btrfs/lockdep wizards,
RT trees have trouble with the BTRFS lockdep positive avoidance lock
class dance (see disk-io.c). Seems the trouble is due to RT not having
a means of telling lockdep that its rwlocks are recursive for read by
the lock owner only, combined with the BTRFS lock class dance assuming
that read_lock() is annotated rwlock_acquire_read(), which RT cannot
do, as that would be a big fat lie.
Creating a rt_read_lock_shared() for btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw() did
indeed make lockdep happy as a clam for test purposes. (hm, submitting
that would be excellent way to replenish frozen shark supply:)
Ideas?
The below is tip-rt, but that's irrelevant. Any RT tree will do, you
just might hit the recently fixed log_mutex gripe instead of the btrfs
-tree-00/btrfs-csum-00 variants you'll eventually hit with log_mutex
splat fixed.
[ 433.956516] =============================================
[ 433.956516] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
[ 433.956518] 4.10.0-rt1-tip-rt #36 Tainted: G E
[ 433.956518] ---------------------------------------------
[ 433.956519] kworker/u8:2/555 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 433.956519] (btrfs-csum-00){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa037fd14>] btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956540]
but task is already holding lock:
[ 433.956540] (btrfs-csum-00){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa037fd14>] btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956551]
other info that might help us debug this:
[ 433.956551] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 433.956552] CPU0
[ 433.956552] ----
[ 433.956552] lock(btrfs-csum-00);
[ 433.956552] lock(btrfs-csum-00);
[ 433.956553]
*** DEADLOCK ***
[ 433.956553] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[ 433.956554] 6 locks held by kworker/u8:2/555:
[ 433.956554] #0: ("%s-%s""btrfs", name){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8109f771>] process_one_work+0x171/0x700
[ 433.956565] #1: ((&work->normal_work)){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff8109f771>] process_one_work+0x171/0x700
[ 433.956567] #2: (sb_internal){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffffa033d4d7>] start_transaction+0x2a7/0x5a0 [btrfs]
[ 433.956576] #3: (btrfs-csum-02){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa037fd14>] btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956585] #4: (btrfs-csum-01){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa037fd14>] btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956593] #5: (btrfs-csum-00){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa037fd14>] btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956601]
Lock class assignment leadin
btrfs-transacti-623 [002] ....... 406.637399: btrfs_set_buffer_lockdep_class: set &eb->lock: ffff88014a087ce0 level: 0 to btrfs-extent-00
kworker/u8:5-558 [000] ....... 429.673871: btrfs_set_buffer_lockdep_class: set &eb->lock: ffff880007073ce0 level: 2 to btrfs-csum-02
kworker/u8:5-558 [000] ....... 429.673904: btrfs_set_buffer_lockdep_class: set &eb->lock: ffff88014a087ce0 level: 1 to btrfs-csum-01
kworker/u8:0-5 [002] ....... 433.022595: btrfs_set_buffer_lockdep_class: set &eb->lock: ffff88009bd98fe0 level: 0 to btrfs-csum-00 *
kworker/u8:2-555 [001] ....... 433.838082: btrfs_set_buffer_lockdep_class: set &eb->lock: ffff880096e924e0 level: 0 to btrfs-csum-00
Our hero about to go splat
kworker/u8:2-555 [000] ....... 434.043172: btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw: read_lock(&eb->lock: ffff880007073ce0) == btrfs-csum-02
kworker/u8:2-555 [000] .....11 434.043172: btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw: read_lock(&eb->lock: ffff88014a087ce0) == btrfs-csum-01
kworker/u8:2-555 [000] .....12 434.043173: btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw: read_lock(&eb->lock: ffff88009bd98fe0) == btrfs-csum-00 set by kworker/u8:0-5
kworker/u8:2-555 [000] .....13 434.043173: btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw: read_lock(&eb->lock: ffff880096e924e0) == btrfs-csum-00 set by hero - two locks, one key - splat
stack backtrace:
[ 433.956602] CPU: 0 PID: 555 Comm: kworker/u8:2 Tainted: G E 4.10.0-rt1-tip-rt #36
[ 433.956603] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.8.1-0-g4adadbd-20161202_174313-build11a 04/01/2014
[ 433.956611] Workqueue: btrfs-endio-write btrfs_endio_write_helper [btrfs]
[ 433.956612] Call Trace:
[ 433.956618] dump_stack+0x85/0xc8
[ 433.956622] __lock_acquire+0x9f9/0x1550
[ 433.956627] ? ring_buffer_lock_reserve+0x115/0x3b0
[ 433.956629] ? ring_buffer_unlock_commit+0x27/0xe0
[ 433.956630] lock_acquire+0xbd/0x250
[ 433.956637] ? btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956641] rt_read_lock+0x47/0x60
[ 433.956648] ? btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956654] btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw+0x74/0x130 [btrfs]
[ 433.956660] btrfs_clear_path_blocking+0x99/0xc0 [btrfs]
[ 433.956667] btrfs_next_old_leaf+0x407/0x440 [btrfs]
[ 433.956674] btrfs_next_leaf+0x10/0x20 [btrfs]
[ 433.956681] btrfs_csum_file_blocks+0x31a/0x5f0 [btrfs]
[ 433.956682] ? migrate_enable+0x87/0x160
[ 433.956690] add_pending_csums.isra.46+0x4d/0x70 [btrfs]
[ 433.956698] btrfs_finish_ordered_io+0x30f/0x710 [btrfs]
[ 433.956705] finish_ordered_fn+0x15/0x20 [btrfs]
[ 433.956714] normal_work_helper+0x104/0x620 [btrfs]
[ 433.956722] btrfs_endio_write_helper+0x12/0x20 [btrfs]
[ 433.956723] process_one_work+0x1f0/0x700
[ 433.956723] ? process_one_work+0x171/0x700
[ 433.956725] worker_thread+0x171/0x530
[ 433.956726] kthread+0x10c/0x140
[ 433.956727] ? create_worker+0x1b0/0x1b0
[ 433.956728] ? kthread_park+0x90/0x90
[ 433.956729] ret_from_fork+0x31/0x40
next reply other threads:[~2017-01-22 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-22 8:46 Mike Galbraith [this message]
2017-01-22 17:45 ` [btrfs/rt] lockdep false positive Mike Galbraith
2017-01-22 18:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-01-23 5:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-01-23 9:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-25 17:02 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-01-25 18:29 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-01-26 17:09 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-01-26 18:01 ` Mike Galbraith
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1485074793.4467.49.camel@gmail.com \
--to=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.