Subject: + printk-fix-one-circular-lockdep-warning-about-console_lock.patch added to -mm tree
To: jiel@xxxxxxxxxxx,jack@xxxxxxx
From: akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 16:35:24 -0700
The patch titled
Subject: printk: fix one circular lockdep warning about console_lock
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
printk-fix-one-circular-lockdep-warning-about-console_lock.patch
This patch should soon appear at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/printk-fix-one-circular-lockdep-warning-about-console_lock.patch
and later at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/printk-fix-one-circular-lockdep-warning-about-console_lock.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Jane Li <jiel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: printk: fix one circular lockdep warning about console_lock
Fix a warning about possible circular locking dependency.
If do in following sequence:
enter suspend -> resume -> plug-out CPUx (echo 0 > cpux/online)
lockdep will show warning as following:
======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
3.10.0 #2 Tainted: G O
-------------------------------------------------------
sh/1271 is trying to acquire lock:
(console_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c06ebf7c>] console_cpu_notify+0x20/0x2c
but task is already holding lock:
(cpu_hotplug.lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c012b4e8>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x2c/0x58
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (cpu_hotplug.lock){+.+.+.}:
[<c017bb7c>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x12c
[<c06f5014>] mutex_lock_nested+0x50/0x3d8
[<c012b4e8>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x2c/0x58
[<c06ebfac>] _cpu_up+0x24/0x154
[<c06ec140>] cpu_up+0x64/0x84
[<c0981834>] smp_init+0x9c/0xd4
[<c0973880>] kernel_init_freeable+0x78/0x1c8
[<c06e7f40>] kernel_init+0x8/0xe4
[<c010eec8>] ret_from_fork+0x14/0x2c
-> #1 (cpu_add_remove_lock){+.+.+.}:
[<c017bb7c>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x12c
[<c06f5014>] mutex_lock_nested+0x50/0x3d8
[<c012b758>] disable_nonboot_cpus+0x8/0xe8
[<c016b83c>] suspend_devices_and_enter+0x214/0x448
[<c016bc54>] pm_suspend+0x1e4/0x284
[<c016bdcc>] try_to_suspend+0xa4/0xbc
[<c0143848>] process_one_work+0x1c4/0x4fc
[<c0143f80>] worker_thread+0x138/0x37c
[<c014aaf8>] kthread+0xa4/0xb0
[<c010eec8>] ret_from_fork+0x14/0x2c
-> #0 (console_lock){+.+.+.}:
[<c017b5d0>] __lock_acquire+0x1b38/0x1b80
[<c017bb7c>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x12c
[<c01288c4>] console_lock+0x54/0x68
[<c06ebf7c>] console_cpu_notify+0x20/0x2c
[<c01501d4>] notifier_call_chain+0x44/0x84
[<c012b448>] __cpu_notify+0x2c/0x48
[<c012b5b0>] cpu_notify_nofail+0x8/0x14
[<c06e81bc>] _cpu_down+0xf4/0x258
[<c06e8344>] cpu_down+0x24/0x40
[<c06e921c>] store_online+0x30/0x74
[<c03b7298>] dev_attr_store+0x18/0x24
[<c025fc5c>] sysfs_write_file+0x16c/0x19c
[<c0207a98>] vfs_write+0xb4/0x190
[<c0207e58>] SyS_write+0x3c/0x70
[<c010ee00>] ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x48
Chain exists of:
console_lock --> cpu_add_remove_lock --> cpu_hotplug.lock
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(cpu_hotplug.lock);
lock(cpu_add_remove_lock);
lock(cpu_hotplug.lock);
lock(console_lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
There are three locks involved in two sequence:
a) pm suspend:
console_lock (@suspend_console())
cpu_add_remove_lock (@disable_nonboot_cpus())
cpu_hotplug.lock (@_cpu_down())
b) Plug-out CPUx:
cpu_add_remove_lock (@(cpu_down())
cpu_hotplug.lock (@_cpu_down())
console_lock (@console_cpu_notify()) => Lockdeps prints warning log.
There should be not real deadlock, as flag of console_suspended can
protect this.
Although console_suspend() releases console_sem, it doesn't tell lockdep
about it. That results in the lockdep warning about circular locking when
doing the following: enter suspend -> resume -> plug-out CPUx (echo 0 >
cpux/online)
Fix the problem by telling lockdep we actually released the semaphore in
console_suspend() and acquired it again in console_resume().
Signed-off-by: Jane Li <jiel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/printk/printk.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff -puN kernel/printk/printk.c~printk-fix-one-circular-lockdep-warning-about-console_lock kernel/printk/printk.c
--- a/kernel/printk/printk.c~printk-fix-one-circular-lockdep-warning-about-console_lock
+++ a/kernel/printk/printk.c
@@ -1883,6 +1883,7 @@ void suspend_console(void)
console_lock();
console_suspended = 1;
up(&console_sem);
+ mutex_release(&console_lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
}
void resume_console(void)
@@ -1890,6 +1891,7 @@ void resume_console(void)
if (!console_suspend_enabled)
return;
down(&console_sem);
+ mutex_acquire(&console_lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
console_suspended = 0;
console_unlock();
}
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from jiel@xxxxxxxxxxx are
printk-fix-one-circular-lockdep-warning-about-console_lock.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
