From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
Evgenii Shatokhin <eshatokhin@virtuozzo.com>,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 00/12]
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 13:58:15 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1808301353170.18557@pobox.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180828143603.4442-1-pmladek@suse.com>
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Petr Mladek wrote:
> livepatch: Atomic replace feature
>
> The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
> more patches touch the same function and there are dependencies
> between them.
>
> This version does another big refactoring based on feedback against
> v11[*]. In particular, it removes the registration step, changes
> the API and handling of livepatch dependencies. The aim is
> to keep the number of possible variants on a sane level.
> It helps the keep the feature "easy" to use and maintain.
>
> [*] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180323120028.31451-1-pmladek@suse.com
Hi,
I've started to review the patch set. Running selftests with lockdep
enabled gives me...
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.17.0-rc1-klp_replace_v12-117114-gfedb3eba611d #218 Tainted: G
K
------------------------------------------------------
kworker/1:1/49 is trying to acquire lock:
00000000bb88dc17 (kn->count#186){++++}, at: kernfs_remove+0x23/0x40
but task is already holding lock:
0000000073632424 (klp_mutex){+.+.}, at: klp_transition_work_fn+0x17/0x40
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (klp_mutex){+.+.}:
lock_acquire+0xd4/0x220
__mutex_lock+0x75/0x920
mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
enabled_store+0x47/0x150
kobj_attr_store+0x12/0x20
sysfs_kf_write+0x4a/0x60
kernfs_fop_write+0x123/0x1b0
__vfs_write+0x2b/0x150
vfs_write+0xc7/0x1c0
ksys_write+0x49/0xa0
__x64_sys_write+0x1a/0x20
do_syscall_64+0x62/0x1b0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
-> #0 (kn->count#186){++++}:
__lock_acquire+0xe9d/0x1240
lock_acquire+0xd4/0x220
__kernfs_remove+0x23c/0x2c0
kernfs_remove+0x23/0x40
sysfs_remove_dir+0x51/0x60
kobject_del+0x18/0x50
kobject_cleanup+0x4b/0x180
kobject_put+0x2a/0x50
__klp_free_patch+0x5b/0x60
klp_free_patch_nowait+0x12/0x30
klp_try_complete_transition+0x13e/0x180
klp_transition_work_fn+0x26/0x40
process_one_work+0x1d8/0x5d0
worker_thread+0x4d/0x3d0
kthread+0x113/0x150
ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(klp_mutex);
lock(kn->count#186);
lock(klp_mutex);
lock(kn->count#186);
*** DEADLOCK ***
3 locks held by kworker/1:1/49: #0: 00000000654f4e5a ((wq_completion)"events"){+.+.}, at:
process_one_work+0x153/0x5d0 #1: 000000003c1dc846 ((klp_transition_work).work){+.+.}, at:
process_one_work+0x153/0x5d0 #2: 0000000073632424 (klp_mutex){+.+.}, at: klp_transition_work_fn+0x17/0x40
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 49 Comm: kworker/1:1 Tainted: G K
4.17.0-rc1-klp_replace_v12-117114-gfedb3eba611d #218
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS
1.0.0-prebuilt.qemu-project.org 04/01/2014
Workqueue: events klp_transition_work_fn
Call Trace:
dump_stack+0x81/0xb8
print_circular_bug.isra.39+0x200/0x20e
check_prev_add.constprop.47+0x725/0x740
? print_shortest_lock_dependencies+0x1c0/0x1c0
__lock_acquire+0xe9d/0x1240
lock_acquire+0xd4/0x220
? kernfs_remove+0x23/0x40
__kernfs_remove+0x23c/0x2c0
? kernfs_remove+0x23/0x40
kernfs_remove+0x23/0x40
sysfs_remove_dir+0x51/0x60
kobject_del+0x18/0x50
kobject_cleanup+0x4b/0x180
kobject_put+0x2a/0x50
__klp_free_patch+0x5b/0x60
klp_free_patch_nowait+0x12/0x30
klp_try_complete_transition+0x13e/0x180
klp_transition_work_fn+0x26/0x40
process_one_work+0x1d8/0x5d0
? process_one_work+0x153/0x5d0
worker_thread+0x4d/0x3d0
? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
kthread+0x113/0x150
? process_one_work+0x5d0/0x5d0
? kthread_delayed_work_timer_fn+0x90/0x90
? kthread_delayed_work_timer_fn+0x90/0x90
ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50
I think it could be related to registration removal and API changes. One
thread writes to sysfs and wants to take klp_mutex there (CPU#1), the
other holds klp_mutex in a transition period and calls klp_free_patch()
to remove the sysfs infrastructure.
Regards,
Miroslav
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-30 11:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-28 14:35 [PATCH v12 00/12] Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 01/12] livepatch: Change void *new_func -> unsigned long new_addr in struct klp_func Petr Mladek
2018-08-31 8:37 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 02/12] livepatch: Helper macros to define livepatch structures Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 03/12] livepatch: Shuffle klp_enable_patch()/klp_disable_patch() code Petr Mladek
2018-08-31 8:38 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 04/12] livepatch: Consolidate klp_free functions Petr Mladek
2018-08-31 10:39 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-12 11:43 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 05/12] livepatch: Refuse to unload only livepatches available during a forced transition Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 06/12] livepatch: Simplify API by removing registration step Petr Mladek
2018-09-05 9:34 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-12 13:01 ` Petr Mladek
2018-10-15 16:01 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-18 14:54 ` Petr Mladek
2018-10-18 15:30 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-19 12:16 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-19 14:36 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-22 13:25 ` Petr Mladek
2018-10-23 16:39 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-24 2:55 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-24 11:14 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 07/12] livepatch: Use lists to manage patches, objects and functions Petr Mladek
2018-09-03 16:00 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-12 12:12 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 08/12] livepatch: Add atomic replace Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 09/12] livepatch: Remove Nop structures when unused Petr Mladek
2018-09-04 14:50 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 10/12] livepatch: Atomic replace and cumulative patches documentation Petr Mladek
2018-09-04 15:15 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 11/12] livepatch: Remove ordering and refuse loading conflicting patches Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 12/12] selftests/livepatch: introduce tests Petr Mladek
2018-08-30 11:58 ` Miroslav Benes [this message]
2018-10-11 12:48 ` [PATCH v12 00/12] Petr Mladek
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=alpine.LSU.2.21.1808301353170.18557@pobox.suse.cz \
--to=mbenes@suse.cz \
--cc=eshatokhin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=jeyu@kernel.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
/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).