From: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v3 14/15] printk: extend console_lock for proper kthread support
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 16:20:52 +0206 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o80tp5lv.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YmKnp3Ccu7laW3E4@alley>
On 2022-04-22, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
> IMHO, it is actually a generic problem of the complex locking scheme
> when there are too many combinations of the protected data.
Sure. We are in a delicate situation of continuing to support the old
locking scheme while transitioning to a new one.
> In the current state, the problem seems to be only with CON_ENABLED
> flag but there might be other hidden races in the future.
>
> IMHO, it would be much easier when there are the following rules:
>
> + console_lock() blocks taking con->lock
> + con->lock blocks taking console_lock()
> + Different con->lock might be taken in parallel
>
> The result would be:
>
> + global variables need to be guarded by the big console_lock()
> + con->lock should be enough to guard per-console variables
> + the big console_lock() would serialize also access to
> per-console variables.
It looks like you are talking about nested locking. This was my original
idea but I had problems relating to kthread stopping. However, the code
has changed a lot since then and now when I look at it, it does not look
like it would be a problem. Getting rid of CON_THD_BLOCKED would greatly
simplify the relationship between console_lock and kthreads.
For this we would need the console list to become a list_head so that it
is doubly linked (in order to unlock in reverse order). That probably
would be a good idea anyway. It is a bit bizarre that printk implements
its own linked list.
> Of course, it is not that simple. I am not 100% that we could
> even achieve this.
It just might be that simple. I will explore it again.
> Anyway, I think about the following wrapper:
>
> void single_console_lock(struct console *con)
> {
> for (;;) {
> error = wait_event_interruptible(log_wait,
> con->flags & CON_THB_BLOCKED);
>
> if (error)
> continue;
>
> mutex_lock(&con->lock);
>
> if (!con->flags & CON_THB_BLOCKED)
> break;
>
> mutex_unlock(&con->lock);
> }
> }
>
> void single_console_unlock(struct console *con)
> {
> mutex_unlock(&con->lock);
> }
>
> We should use it everywhere instead of the simple mutex_lock(con->lock)
> and mutex_lock(con->lock). And we could remove mutex_lock()/unlock()
> from code called under the big console_lock().
Hmmm. Waiting on @log_wait is not correct. A @log_wait wakeup with the
kthread already in the blocked state is unusual. There would need to be
a per-console waitqueue for when the kthread unlocks its mutex.
Maybe something like:
void single_console_lock(struct console *con)
{
for (;;) {
error = wait_event_interruptible(con->lock_wait,
!(con->flags & CON_THB_BLOCKED));
if (error)
continue;
mutex_lock(&con->lock);
if (!(con->flags & CON_THB_BLOCKED))
break;
mutex_unlock(&con->lock);
}
}
And in printk_kthread_func(), after the kthread unlocks its con->lock,
it calls:
if (wq_has_sleeper(&con->lock_wait))
wake_up_interruptible_all(&con->lock_wait);
But single_console_lock() would not be allowed to be called under
console_lock(), so I don't see how it is useful. con->flags is always
modified under @console_sem to make sure the console does not disappear.
Anyway, I will first look into the nested locking solution. That seems
more promising to me and it would go a long way to simplify the locking
hierarchy.
John
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-22 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-19 23:46 [PATCH printk v3 00/15] printk/for-next John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 01/15] printk: rename cpulock functions John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 02/15] printk: cpu sync always disable interrupts John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 03/15] printk: add missing memory barrier to wake_up_klogd() John Ogness
2022-04-20 12:34 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 04/15] printk: wake up all waiters John Ogness
2022-04-20 12:36 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 05/15] printk: wake waiters for safe and NMI contexts John Ogness
2022-04-20 13:55 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 06/15] printk: get caller_id/timestamp after migration disable John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 07/15] printk: call boot_delay_msec() in printk_delay() John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 08/15] printk: add con_printk() macro for console details John Ogness
2022-04-20 14:01 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 09/15] printk: refactor and rework printing logic John Ogness
2022-04-20 14:55 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 10/15] printk: move buffer definitions into console_emit_next_record() caller John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 11/15] printk: add pr_flush() John Ogness
2022-04-20 15:10 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 12/15] printk: add functions to prefer direct printing John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 13/15] printk: add kthread console printers John Ogness
2022-04-20 17:53 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-20 20:02 ` John Ogness
2022-04-21 14:25 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 14/15] printk: extend console_lock for proper kthread support John Ogness
2022-04-20 2:13 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-20 13:32 ` John Ogness
2022-04-20 4:04 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-21 12:41 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-21 14:30 ` John Ogness
2022-04-22 13:03 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-22 14:14 ` John Ogness [this message]
2022-04-22 15:15 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-22 21:25 ` John Ogness
2022-04-25 15:18 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-25 19:10 ` John Ogness
2022-04-19 23:46 ` [PATCH printk v3 15/15] printk: remove @console_locked John Ogness
2022-04-21 12:46 ` Petr Mladek
2022-04-21 14:40 ` [PATCH printk v3 00/15] printk/for-next Petr Mladek
2022-04-21 15:02 ` John Ogness
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=87o80tp5lv.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de \
--to=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).