From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> Subject: [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 14/20] lockdep: Take read/write status in consideration when generate chainkey Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 21:51:04 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180411135110.9217-15-boqun.feng@gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20180411135110.9217-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com> Currently, the chainkey of a lock chain is a hash sum of the class_idx of all the held locks, the read/write status are not taken in to consideration while generating the chainkey. This could result into a problem, if we have: P1() { read_lock(B); lock(A); } P2() { lock(A); read_lock(B); } P3() { lock(A); write_lock(B); } , and P1(), P2(), P3() run one by one. And when running P2(), lockdep detects such a lock chain A -> B is not a deadlock, then it's added in the chain cache, and then when running P3(), even if it's a deadlock, we could miss it because of the hit of chain cache. This could be confirmed by self testcase "chain cached mixed R-L/L-W ". To resolve this, we use concept "hlock_id" to generate the chainkey, the hlock_id is a tuple (hlock->class_idx, hlock->read), which fits in a u16 type. With this, the chainkeys are different is the lock sequences have the same locks but different read/write status. Besides, since we use "hlock_id" to generate chainkeys, the chain_hlocks array now store the "hlock_id"s rather than lock_class indexes. Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> --- kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c index 45a370438add..d88fded8b339 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c @@ -307,6 +307,21 @@ static struct hlist_head classhash_table[CLASSHASH_SIZE]; static struct hlist_head chainhash_table[CHAINHASH_SIZE]; +/* + * the id of held_lock + */ +static inline u16 hlock_id(struct held_lock *hlock) +{ + BUILD_BUG_ON(MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS_BITS + 2 > 16); + + return (hlock->class_idx | (hlock->read << MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS_BITS)); +} + +static inline unsigned int chain_hlock_class_idx(u16 hlock_id) +{ + return hlock_id & MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS; +} + /* * The hash key of the lock dependency chains is a hash itself too: * it's a hash of all locks taken up to that lock, including that lock. @@ -2283,7 +2298,10 @@ static u16 chain_hlocks[MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS]; struct lock_class *lock_chain_get_class(struct lock_chain *chain, int i) { - return lock_classes + chain_hlocks[chain->base + i]; + u16 chain_hlock = chain_hlocks[chain->base + i]; + unsigned int class_idx = chain_hlock_class_idx(chain_hlock); + + return lock_classes + class_idx - 1; } /* @@ -2309,12 +2327,12 @@ static inline int get_first_held_lock(struct task_struct *curr, /* * Returns the next chain_key iteration */ -static u64 print_chain_key_iteration(int class_idx, u64 chain_key) +static u64 print_chain_key_iteration(u16 hlock_id, u64 chain_key) { - u64 new_chain_key = iterate_chain_key(chain_key, class_idx); + u64 new_chain_key = iterate_chain_key(chain_key, hlock_id); - printk(" class_idx:%d -> chain_key:%016Lx", - class_idx, + printk(" hlock_id:%d -> chain_key:%016Lx", + (unsigned int)hlock_id, (unsigned long long)new_chain_key); return new_chain_key; } @@ -2330,12 +2348,12 @@ print_chain_keys_held_locks(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *hlock_ne printk("depth: %u\n", depth + 1); for (i = get_first_held_lock(curr, hlock_next); i < depth; i++) { hlock = curr->held_locks + i; - chain_key = print_chain_key_iteration(hlock->class_idx, chain_key); + chain_key = print_chain_key_iteration(hlock_id(hlock), chain_key); print_lock(hlock); } - print_chain_key_iteration(hlock_next->class_idx, chain_key); + print_chain_key_iteration(hlock_id(hlock_next), chain_key); print_lock(hlock_next); } @@ -2343,14 +2361,14 @@ static void print_chain_keys_chain(struct lock_chain *chain) { int i; u64 chain_key = 0; - int class_id; + u16 hlock_id; printk("depth: %u\n", chain->depth); for (i = 0; i < chain->depth; i++) { - class_id = chain_hlocks[chain->base + i]; - chain_key = print_chain_key_iteration(class_id + 1, chain_key); + hlock_id = chain_hlocks[chain->base + i]; + chain_key = print_chain_key_iteration(hlock_id, chain_key); - print_lock_name(lock_classes + class_id); + print_lock_name(lock_classes + chain_hlock_class_idx(hlock_id) - 1); printk("\n"); } } @@ -2399,7 +2417,7 @@ static int check_no_collision(struct task_struct *curr, } for (j = 0; j < chain->depth - 1; j++, i++) { - id = curr->held_locks[i].class_idx - 1; + id = hlock_id(&curr->held_locks[i]); if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(chain_hlocks[chain->base + j] != id)) { print_collision(curr, hlock, chain); @@ -2456,8 +2474,8 @@ static inline int add_chain_cache_classes(unsigned int prev, if (likely(nr_chain_hlocks + chain->depth <= MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS)) { chain->base = nr_chain_hlocks; nr_chain_hlocks += chain->depth; - chain_hlocks[chain->base] = prev - 1; - chain_hlocks[chain->base + 1] = next -1; + chain_hlocks[chain->base] = prev; + chain_hlocks[chain->base + 1] = next; } #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP /* @@ -2491,7 +2509,6 @@ static inline int add_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *hlock, u64 chain_key) { - struct lock_class *class = hlock_class(hlock); struct hlist_head *hash_head = chainhashentry(chain_key); struct lock_chain *chain; int i, j; @@ -2530,10 +2547,9 @@ static inline int add_chain_cache(struct task_struct *curr, if (likely(nr_chain_hlocks + chain->depth <= MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS)) { chain->base = nr_chain_hlocks; for (j = 0; j < chain->depth - 1; j++, i++) { - int lock_id = curr->held_locks[i].class_idx - 1; - chain_hlocks[chain->base + j] = lock_id; + chain_hlocks[chain->base + j] = hlock_id(&curr->held_locks[i]); } - chain_hlocks[chain->base + j] = class - lock_classes; + chain_hlocks[chain->base + j] = hlock_id(hlock); } if (nr_chain_hlocks < MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS) @@ -2731,7 +2747,7 @@ static void check_chain_key(struct task_struct *curr) if (prev_hlock && (prev_hlock->irq_context != hlock->irq_context)) chain_key = 0; - chain_key = iterate_chain_key(chain_key, hlock->class_idx); + chain_key = iterate_chain_key(chain_key, hlock_id(hlock)); prev_hlock = hlock; } if (chain_key != curr->curr_chain_key) { @@ -3672,7 +3688,7 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, chain_key = 0; chain_head = 1; } - chain_key = iterate_chain_key(chain_key, class_idx); + chain_key = iterate_chain_key(chain_key, hlock_id(hlock)); if (nest_lock && !__lock_is_held(nest_lock, -1)) return print_lock_nested_lock_not_held(curr, hlock, ip); -- 2.16.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-11 13:48 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-04-11 13:50 [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 00/20] lockdep: Support deadlock detection for recursive read locks Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 01/20] lockdep/Documention: Recursive read lock detection reasoning Boqun Feng 2018-04-15 0:38 ` Randy Dunlap 2018-04-16 6:29 ` Boqun Feng 2018-04-27 13:50 ` Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 02/20] lockdep: Demagic the return value of BFS Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 03/20] lockdep: Make __bfs() visit every dependency until a match Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 04/20] lockdep: Redefine LOCK_*_STATE* bits Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 05/20] lockdep: Reduce the size of lock_list::distance Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 06/20] lockdep: Introduce lock_list::dep Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 07/20] lockdep: Extend __bfs() to work with multiple types of dependencies Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 08/20] lockdep: Make __bfs(.match) return bool Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:50 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 09/20] lockdep: Support deadlock detection for recursive read locks in check_noncircular() Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 10/20] lockdep: Adjust check_redundant() for recursive read change Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 11/20] lockdep: Fix recursive read lock related safe->unsafe detection Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 12/20] lockdep: Add recursive read locks into dependency graph Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 13/20] lockdep/selftest: Add a R-L/L-W test case specific to chain cache behavior Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` Boqun Feng [this message] 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 15/20] lockdep/selftest: Unleash irq_read_recursion2 and add more Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 16/20] lockdep/selftest: Add more recursive read related test cases Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 17/20] Revert "locking/lockdep/selftests: Fix mixed read-write ABBA tests" Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:51 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 18/20] MAINTAINERS: Add myself as a LOCKING PRIMITIVES reviewer Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:56 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 19/20] rcu: Equip sleepable RCU with lockdep dependency graph checks Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 18:57 ` Paul E. McKenney 2018-04-12 2:12 ` Boqun Feng 2018-04-12 9:12 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-04-13 13:24 ` Boqun Feng 2018-04-11 13:57 ` [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 20/20] lockdep/selftest: Add a test case for SRCU Boqun Feng
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=20180411135110.9217-15-boqun.feng@gmail.com \ --to=boqun.feng@gmail.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \ --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --subject='Re: [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 14/20] lockdep: Take read/write status in consideration when generate chainkey' \ /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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).