From: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sramana@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu_rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 01:06:07 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7803e498-5fc8-9b72-3e1b-76005f7673a3@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <734eb2ec2c3aeba1c4d054c1fceacef1@suse.de>
On 12/03/2018 12:08 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On 2018-11-30 07:10, Prateek Sood wrote:
>> In a scenario where cpu_hotplug_lock percpu_rw_semaphore is already
>> acquired for read operation by P1 using percpu_down_read().
>>
>> Now we have P1 in the path of releaseing the cpu_hotplug_lock and P2
>> is in the process of acquiring cpu_hotplug_lock.
>>
>> P1 P2
>> percpu_up_read() path percpu_down_write() path
>>
>> rcu_sync_enter() //gp_state=GP_PASSED
>>
>> rcu_sync_is_idle() //returns false down_write(rw_sem)
>>
>> __percpu_up_read()
>>
>> [L] task = rcu_dereference(w->task) //NULL
>>
>> smp_rmb() [S] w->task = current
>>
>> smp_mb()
>>
>> [L] readers_active_check() //fails
>> schedule()
>>
>> [S] __this_cpu_dec(read_count)
>>
>> Since load of task can result in NULL. This can lead to missed wakeup
>> in rcuwait_wake_up(). Above sequence violated the following constraint
>> in rcuwait_wake_up():
>>
>> WAIT WAKE
>> [S] tsk = current [S] cond = true
>> MB (A) MB (B)
>> [L] cond [L] tsk
>>
>
> Hmm yeah we don't want rcu_wake_up() to get hoisted over the __this_cpu_dec(read_count). The smp_rmb() does not make sense to me here in the first place. Did you run into this scenario by code inspection or you actually it the issue?
>
> Thanks,
> Davidlohr
I have checked one issue where it seems that cpu hotplug code
path is not able to get cpu_hotplug_lock in write mode and there
is a reader pending for cpu hotplug path to release
percpu_rw_semaphore->rwsem to acquire cpu_hotplug_lock.
This caused a deadlock.
From code inspection also it seems to be not adhering to arm64
smp_rmb() constraint of load/load-store ordering guarantee.
Thanks,
Prateek
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation
Center, Inc., is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation
Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-03 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-30 15:10 [PATCH] percpu_rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load Prateek Sood
2018-12-03 6:38 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2018-12-03 19:36 ` Prateek Sood [this message]
2018-12-12 14:26 ` Prateek Sood
2018-12-12 15:31 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2018-12-21 7:29 ` Prateek Sood
2018-12-21 9:45 ` Andrea Parri
2018-12-12 15:28 ` Andrea Parri
2018-12-21 6:35 ` Prateek Sood
2019-01-21 11:25 ` [tip:locking/core] sched/wait: Fix rcuwait_wake_up() ordering tip-bot for Prateek Sood
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=7803e498-5fc8-9b72-3e1b-76005f7673a3@codeaurora.org \
--to=prsood@codeaurora.org \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sramana@codeaurora.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 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).