Linux-ACPI Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <>
Cc: LKML <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Sebastian Siewior <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Joel Fernandes <>,
	Oleg Nesterov <>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <>,
	Jonathan Corbet <>,
	Randy Dunlap <>,
	Logan Gunthorpe <>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <>,
	Kurt Schwemmer <>,,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	Felipe Balbi <>,, Kalle Valo <>,
	"David S. Miller" <>,,,
	Darren Hart <>,
	Andy Shevchenko <>,,
	Zhang Rui <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,, Len Brown <>,, kbuild test robot <>,
	Nick Hu <>, Greentime Hu <>,
	Vincent Chen <>, Guo Ren <>,, Brian Cain <>,, Tony Luck <>,
	Fenghua Yu <>,, Michal Simek <>,
	Michael Ellerman <>,
	Arnd Bergmann <>, Geoff Levand <>,, Davidlohr Bueso <>
Subject: Re: [patch V3 13/20] Documentation: Add lock ordering and nesting documentation
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 00:13:34 +0100
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200323025501.GE3199@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>


"Paul E. McKenney" <> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 12:25:57PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> In the normal case where the task sleeps through the entire lock
> acquisition, the sequence of events is as follows:
>      state = UNINTERRUPTIBLE
>      lock()
>        block()
>          real_state = state
>          state = SLEEPONLOCK
>                                lock wakeup
>                                  state = real_state == UNINTERRUPTIBLE
> This sequence of events can occur when the task acquires spinlocks
> on its way to sleeping, for example, in a call to wait_event().
> The non-lock wakeup can occur when a wakeup races with this wait_event(),
> which can result in the following sequence of events:
>      state = UNINTERRUPTIBLE
>      lock()
>        block()
>          real_state = state
>          state = SLEEPONLOCK
>                              non lock wakeup
>                                  real_state = RUNNING
>                                lock wakeup
>                                  state = real_state == RUNNING
> Without this real_state subterfuge, the wakeup might be lost.

I added this with a few modifications which reflect the actual
implementation. Conceptually the same.

> rwsems have grown special-purpose interfaces that allow non-owner release.
> This non-owner release prevents PREEMPT_RT from substituting RT-mutex
> implementations, for example, by defeating priority inheritance.
> After all, if the lock has no owner, whose priority should be boosted?
> As a result, PREEMPT_RT does not currently support rwsem, which in turn
> means that code using it must therefore be disabled until a workable
> solution presents itself.
> [ Note: Not as confident as I would like to be in the above. ]

I'm not confident either especially not after looking at the actual

In fact I feel really stupid because the rw_semaphore reader non-owner
restriction on RT simply does not exist anymore and my history biased
memory tricked me.

The first rw_semaphore implementation of RT was simple and restricted
the reader side to a single reader to support PI on both the reader and
the writer side. That obviosuly did not scale well and made mmap_sem
heavy use cases pretty unhappy.

The short interlude with multi-reader boosting turned out to be a failed
experiment - Steven might still disagree though :)

At some point we gave up and I myself (sic!) reimplemented the RT
variant of rw_semaphore with a reader biased mechanism.

The reader never holds the underlying rt_mutex accross the read side
critical section. It merily increments the reader count and drops it on

The only time a reader takes the rt_mutex is when it blocks on a
writer. Writers hold the rt_mutex across the write side critical section
to allow incoming readers to boost them. Once the writer releases the
rw_semaphore it unlocks the rt_mutex which is then handed off to the
readers. They increment the reader count and then drop the rt_mutex
before continuing in the read side critical section.

So while I changed the implementation it did obviously not occur to me
that this also lifted the non-owner release restriction. Nobody else
noticed either. So we kept dragging this along in both memory and
implementation. Both will be fixed now :)

The owner semantics of down/up_read() are only enforced by lockdep. That
applies to both RT and !RT. The up/down_read_non_owner() variants are
just there to tell lockdep about it.

So, I picked up your other suggestions with slight modifications and
adjusted the owner, semaphore and rw_semaphore docs accordingly.

Please have a close look at the patch below (applies on tip core/locking).


        tglx, who is searching a brown paperbag


 Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst |  148 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

--- a/Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst
+++ b/Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst
@@ -67,6 +67,17 @@ Spinning locks implicitly disable preemp
  _irqsave/restore()   Save and disable / restore interrupt disabled state
  ===================  ====================================================
+Owner semantics
+The aforementioned lock types except semaphores have strict owner
+  The context (task) that acquired the lock must release it.
+rw_semaphores have a special interface which allows non-owner release for
@@ -83,6 +94,51 @@ interrupt handlers and soft interrupts.
 and rwlock_t to be implemented via RT-mutexes.
+semaphore is a counting semaphore implementation.
+Semaphores are often used for both serialization and waiting, but new use
+cases should instead use separate serialization and wait mechanisms, such
+as mutexes and completions.
+sempahores and PREEMPT_RT
+PREEMPT_RT does not change the sempahore implementation. That's impossible
+due to the counting semaphore semantics which have no concept of owners.
+The lack of an owner conflicts with priority inheritance. After all an
+unknown owner cannot be boosted. As a consequence blocking on semaphores
+can be subject to priority inversion.
+rw_semaphore is a multiple readers and single writer lock mechanism.
+On non-PREEMPT_RT kernels the implementation is fair, thus preventing
+writer starvation.
+rw_semaphore complies by default with the strict owner semantics, but there
+exist special-purpose interfaces that allow non-owner release for readers.
+These work independent of the kernel configuration.
+rw_sempahore and PREEMPT_RT
+PREEMPT_RT kernels map rw_sempahore to a separate rt_mutex-based
+implementation, thus changing the fairness:
+ Because an rw_sempaphore writer cannot grant its priority to multiple
+ readers, a preempted low-priority reader will continue holding its lock,
+ thus starving even high-priority writers.  In contrast, because readers
+ can grant their priority to a writer, a preempted low-priority writer will
+ have its priority boosted until it releases the lock, thus preventing that
+ writer from starving readers.
 raw_spinlock_t and spinlock_t
@@ -140,7 +196,16 @@ On a PREEMPT_RT enabled kernel spinlock_
    kernels leave task state untouched.  However, PREEMPT_RT must change
    task state if the task blocks during acquisition.  Therefore, it saves
    the current task state before blocking and the corresponding lock wakeup
-   restores it.
+   restores it::
+    task->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
+     lock()
+       block()
+         task->saved_state = task->state
+	 schedule()
+					lock wakeup
+					  task->state = task->saved_state
    Other types of wakeups would normally unconditionally set the task state
    to RUNNING, but that does not work here because the task must remain
@@ -148,7 +213,22 @@ On a PREEMPT_RT enabled kernel spinlock_
    wakeup attempts to awaken a task blocked waiting for a spinlock, it
    instead sets the saved state to RUNNING.  Then, when the lock
    acquisition completes, the lock wakeup sets the task state to the saved
-   state, in this case setting it to RUNNING.
+   state, in this case setting it to RUNNING::
+    task->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
+     lock()
+       block()
+         task->saved_state = task->state
+	 schedule()
+					non lock wakeup
+					  task->saved_state = TASK_RUNNING
+					lock wakeup
+					  task->state = task->saved_state
+   This ensures that the real wakeup cannot be lost.
@@ -228,17 +308,16 @@ while holding normal non-raw spinlocks b
 bit spinlocks
-Bit spinlocks are problematic for PREEMPT_RT as they cannot be easily
-substituted by an RT-mutex based implementation for obvious reasons.
-The semantics of bit spinlocks are preserved on PREEMPT_RT kernels and the
-caveats vs. raw_spinlock_t apply.
-Some bit spinlocks are substituted by regular spinlock_t for PREEMPT_RT but
-this requires conditional (#ifdef'ed) code changes at the usage site while
-the spinlock_t substitution is simply done by the compiler and the
-conditionals are restricted to header files and core implementation of the
-locking primitives and the usage sites do not require any changes.
+PREEMPT_RT cannot substitute bit spinlocks because a single bit is too
+small to accommodate an RT-mutex.  Therefore, the semantics of bit
+spinlocks are preserved on PREEMPT_RT kernels, so that the raw_spinlock_t
+caveats also apply to bit spinlocks.
+Some bit spinlocks are replaced with regular spinlock_t for PREEMPT_RT
+using conditional (#ifdef'ed) code changes at the usage site.  In contrast,
+usage-site changes are not needed for the spinlock_t substitution.
+Instead, conditionals in header files and the core locking implemementation
+enable the compiler to do the substitution transparently.
 Lock type nesting rules
@@ -254,46 +333,15 @@ Lock type nesting rules
   - Spinning lock types can nest inside sleeping lock types.
-These rules apply in general independent of CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT.
+These constraints apply both in CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT and otherwise.
-As PREEMPT_RT changes the lock category of spinlock_t and rwlock_t from
-spinning to sleeping this has obviously restrictions how they can nest with
-This results in the following nest ordering:
+The fact that PREEMPT_RT changes the lock category of spinlock_t and
+rwlock_t from spinning to sleeping means that they cannot be acquired while
+holding a raw spinlock.  This results in the following nesting ordering:
   1) Sleeping locks
   2) spinlock_t and rwlock_t
   3) raw_spinlock_t and bit spinlocks
-Lockdep is aware of these constraints to ensure that they are respected.
-Owner semantics
-Most lock types in the Linux kernel have strict owner semantics, i.e. the
-context (task) which acquires a lock has to release it.
-There are two exceptions:
-  - semaphores
-  - rwsems
-semaphores have no owner semantics for historical reason, and as such
-trylock and release operations can be called from any context. They are
-often used for both serialization and waiting purposes. That's generally
-discouraged and should be replaced by separate serialization and wait
-mechanisms, such as mutexes and completions.
-rwsems have grown interfaces which allow non owner release for special
-purposes. This usage is problematic on PREEMPT_RT because PREEMPT_RT
-substitutes all locking primitives except semaphores with RT-mutex based
-implementations to provide priority inheritance for all lock types except
-the truly spinning ones. Priority inheritance on ownerless locks is
-obviously impossible.
-For now the rwsem non-owner release excludes code which utilizes it from
-being used on PREEMPT_RT enabled kernels. In same cases this can be
-mitigated by disabling portions of the code, in other cases the complete
-functionality has to be disabled until a workable solution has been found.
+Lockdep will complain if these constraints are violated, both in
+CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT and otherwise.

  reply index

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-21 11:25 [patch V3 00/20] Lock ordering documentation and annotation for lockdep Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 01/20] PCI/switchtec: Fix init_completion race condition with poll_wait() Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 02/20] pci/switchtec: Replace completion wait queue usage for poll Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 03/20] usb: gadget: Use completion interface instead of open coding it Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-25  8:37   ` Felipe Balbi
2020-03-27 12:14     ` Sebastian Siewior
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 04/20] orinoco_usb: Use the regular completion interfaces Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 05/20] acpi: Remove header dependency Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 06/20] nds32: Remove mm.h from asm/uaccess.h Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 07/20] csky: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 08/20] hexagon: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-23 21:46   ` Brian Cain
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 09/20] ia64: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 10/20] microblaze: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 11/20] rcuwait: Add @state argument to rcuwait_wait_event() Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 12/20] powerpc/ps3: Convert half completion to rcuwait Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 13:22   ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-27 19:14   ` Geoff Levand
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 13/20] Documentation: Add lock ordering and nesting documentation Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-23  2:55   ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-24 23:13     ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2020-03-25  0:28       ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-25 12:27         ` Documentation/locking/locktypes: Further clarifications and wordsmithing Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-25 16:02           ` Sebastian Siewior
2020-03-25 16:39             ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-25 16:54               ` Sebastian Siewior
2020-03-25 16:58           ` [PATCH v2] Documentation/locking/locktypes: minor copy editor fixes Randy Dunlap
2020-03-26  2:40             ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 14/20] timekeeping: Split jiffies seqlock Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:25 ` [patch V3 15/20] sched/swait: Prepare usage in completions Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:26 ` [patch V3 16/20] completion: Use simple wait queues Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-23 15:20   ` [PATCH] completion: Use lockdep_assert_RT_in_threaded_ctx() in complete_all() Sebastian Siewior
2020-03-21 11:26 ` [patch V3 17/20] lockdep: Introduce wait-type checks Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:26 ` [patch V3 18/20] lockdep: Add hrtimer context tracing bits Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:26 ` [patch V3 19/20] lockdep: Annotate irq_work Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 11:26 ` [patch V3 20/20] lockdep: Add posixtimer context tracing bits Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-21 17:19 ` [patch V3 00/20] Lock ordering documentation and annotation for lockdep Davidlohr Bueso
2020-03-21 17:45   ` Thomas Gleixner

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-ACPI Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror linux-acpi/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-acpi linux-acpi/ \
	public-inbox-index linux-acpi

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone