From patchwork Wed Dec 11 19:11:36 2013 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: John Stultz X-Patchwork-Id: 22254 Return-Path: X-Original-To: linaro@patches.linaro.org Delivered-To: linaro@patches.linaro.org Received: from mail-yh0-f70.google.com (mail-yh0-f70.google.com [209.85.213.70]) by ip-10-151-82-157.ec2.internal (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 425CA23FC9 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 19:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yh0-f70.google.com with SMTP id l109sf14198264yhq.9 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:delivered-to:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-unsubscribe; bh=EooRPrFywILQhV06ePlqffViTUjHCsdu90GdM7g4sqQ=; b=iTRPwrGZrJQPD1qDxeStVMmORyDos4nyoTjDodUelGawSwYPQ5t2LdmlshYk/avyE8 TiJvWbhWuTNUyDEXfbxVXbnjE+t4IGl7ccghCqEl9nzNyp+/yWNJTFQBpC2CO4n6nL+U PcxMvhObqbcIh07675QozqhnLzyxX8SGMnvB8fGdBTkcnuYoAacqXzoVQ5mERfVb9eOb Eqx8D18xXygdDKj0we3KUt5WVpXbgCOL3m1LeI8jdJx+o/0ISQidYl34oUghX3hvO0jS +8RX1JhmoCFFqyk8C/w09GJPhN+0/We8QT/4lb7IuR/H8gx/zaAG/Vs9nYPrAj/k29Uj puoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkPBl+R68kEYm8YeWjtWeEYzub9U9Taf1tewqnen6FJIsiKkRXpNG1nTvPni/MWTE/PhajQ X-Received: by 10.58.76.129 with SMTP id k1mr1268065vew.19.1386789109975; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: patchwork-forward@linaro.org Received: by 10.49.127.46 with SMTP id nd14ls194851qeb.19.gmail; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:49 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.52.241.105 with SMTP id wh9mr317598vdc.83.1386789109864; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vc0-f171.google.com (mail-vc0-f171.google.com [209.85.220.171]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qy6si6750097vcb.1.2013.12.11.11.11.49 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:49 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.220.171 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of patch+caf_=patchwork-forward=linaro.org@linaro.org) client-ip=209.85.220.171; Received: by mail-vc0-f171.google.com with SMTP id ik5so6040588vcb.30 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:49 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.52.230.102 with SMTP id sx6mr1012084vdc.15.1386789109753; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:49 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-To: patchwork-forward@linaro.org X-Forwarded-For: patch@linaro.org patchwork-forward@linaro.org Delivered-To: patches@linaro.org Received: by 10.220.174.196 with SMTP id u4csp296251vcz; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:49 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.68.232.132 with SMTP id to4mr3847392pbc.141.1386789108356; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pd0-f179.google.com (mail-pd0-f179.google.com [209.85.192.179]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ty3si14364358pbc.137.2013.12.11.11.11.47 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:48 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.192.179 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of john.stultz@linaro.org) client-ip=209.85.192.179; Received: by mail-pd0-f179.google.com with SMTP id r10so10044652pdi.24 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:47 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.68.143.132 with SMTP id se4mr3826202pbb.167.1386789107867; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-67-170-153-23.hsd1.or.comcast.net. [67.170.153.23]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ki1sm34506989pbd.1.2013.12.11.11.11.46 for (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:47 -0800 (PST) From: John Stultz To: LKML Cc: John Stultz , Thomas Gleixner , Prarit Bhargava , Richard Cochran , Ingo Molnar , Sasha Levin , stable Subject: [RFC][PATCH 3/5] timekeeping: Avoid possible deadlock from clock_was_set_delayed Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:11:36 -0800 Message-Id: <1386789098-17391-4-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.3.2 In-Reply-To: <1386789098-17391-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> References: <1386789098-17391-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> X-Removed-Original-Auth: Dkim didn't pass. X-Original-Sender: john.stultz@linaro.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.220.171 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of patch+caf_=patchwork-forward=linaro.org@linaro.org) smtp.mail=patch+caf_=patchwork-forward=linaro.org@linaro.org Precedence: list Mailing-list: list patchwork-forward@linaro.org; contact patchwork-forward+owners@linaro.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 836684582541 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , As part of normal operaions, the hrtimer subsystem frequently calls into the timekeeping code, creating a locking order of hrtimer locks -> timekeeping locks clock_was_set_delayed() was suppoed to allow us to avoid deadlocks between the timekeeping the hrtimer subsystem, so that we could notify the hrtimer subsytem the time had changed while holding the timekeeping locks. This was done by scheduling delayed work that would run later once we were out of the timekeeing code. But unfortunately the lock chains are complex enoguh that in scheduling delayed work, we end up eventually trying to grab an hrtimer lock. Sasha Levin noticed this in testing when the new seqlock lockdep enablement triggered the following (somewhat abrieviated) message: [ 251.100221] ====================================================== [ 251.100221] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] [ 251.100221] 3.13.0-rc2-next-20131206-sasha-00005-g8be2375-dirty #4053 Not tainted [ 251.101967] ------------------------------------------------------- [ 251.101967] kworker/10:1/4506 is trying to acquire lock: [ 251.101967] (timekeeper_seq){----..}, at: [] retrigger_next_event+0x56/0x70 [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] but task is already holding lock: [ 251.101967] (hrtimer_bases.lock#11){-.-...}, at: [] retrigger_next_event+0x3c/0x70 [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] which lock already depends on the new lock. [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: [ 251.101967] -> #5 (hrtimer_bases.lock#11){-.-...}: [snipped] -> #4 (&rt_b->rt_runtime_lock){-.-...}: [snipped] -> #3 (&rq->lock){-.-.-.}: [snipped] -> #2 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.-.}: [snipped] -> #1 (&(&pool->lock)->rlock){-.-...}: [ 251.101967] [] validate_chain+0x6c3/0x7b0 [ 251.101967] [] __lock_acquire+0x4ad/0x580 [ 251.101967] [] lock_acquire+0x182/0x1d0 [ 251.101967] [] _raw_spin_lock+0x40/0x80 [ 251.101967] [] __queue_work+0x1a9/0x3f0 [ 251.101967] [] queue_work_on+0x98/0x120 [ 251.101967] [] clock_was_set_delayed+0x21/0x30 [ 251.101967] [] do_adjtimex+0x111/0x160 [ 251.101967] [] compat_sys_adjtimex+0x41/0x70 [ 251.101967] [] ia32_sysret+0x0/0x5 [ 251.101967] -> #0 (timekeeper_seq){----..}: [snipped] [ 251.101967] other info that might help us debug this: [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] Chain exists of: timekeeper_seq --> &rt_b->rt_runtime_lock --> hrtimer_bases.lock#11 [ 251.101967] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] CPU0 CPU1 [ 251.101967] ---- ---- [ 251.101967] lock(hrtimer_bases.lock#11); [ 251.101967] lock(&rt_b->rt_runtime_lock); [ 251.101967] lock(hrtimer_bases.lock#11); [ 251.101967] lock(timekeeper_seq); [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] 3 locks held by kworker/10:1/4506: [ 251.101967] #0: (events){.+.+.+}, at: [] process_one_work+0x200/0x530 [ 251.101967] #1: (hrtimer_work){+.+...}, at: [] process_one_work+0x200/0x530 [ 251.101967] #2: (hrtimer_bases.lock#11){-.-...}, at: [] retrigger_next_event+0x3c/0x70 [ 251.101967] [ 251.101967] stack backtrace: [ 251.101967] CPU: 10 PID: 4506 Comm: kworker/10:1 Not tainted 3.13.0-rc2-next-20131206-sasha-00005-g8be2375-dirty #4053 [ 251.101967] Workqueue: events clock_was_set_work So the best solution is to avoid calling clock_was_set_delayed() while holding the timekeeping lock, and instead using a flag variable to decide if we should call clock_was_set() once we've released the locks. This works for the case here, where the do_adjtimex() was the deadlock trigger point. Unfortuantely, in update_wall_time() we still hold the jiffies lock, which would deadlock with the ipi triggered by clock_was_set(), preventing us from calling it even after we drop the timekeeping lock. So instead call clock_was_set_delayed() at that point. Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Prarit Bhargava Cc: Richard Cochran Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Sasha Levin Cc: stable #3.10+ Reported-by: Sasha Levin Signed-off-by: John Stultz --- kernel/time/timekeeping.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c index 998ec751..c1d36b6 100644 --- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c +++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c @@ -1278,7 +1278,6 @@ static inline unsigned int accumulate_nsecs_to_secs(struct timekeeper *tk) __timekeeping_set_tai_offset(tk, tk->tai_offset - leap); - clock_was_set_delayed(); action = TK_CLOCK_WAS_SET; } } @@ -1440,6 +1439,19 @@ static void update_wall_time(void) write_seqcount_end(&timekeeper_seq); out: raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&timekeeper_lock, flags); + if (action & TK_CLOCK_WAS_SET) { + /* + * XXX - I'd rather we just call clock_was_set(), but + * since we're currently holding the jiffies lock, calling + * clock_was_set would trigger an ipi which would then grab + * the jiffies lock and we'd deadlock. :( + * The right solution should probably be droping + * the jiffies lock before calling update_wall_time + * but that requires some rework of the tick sched + * code. + */ + clock_was_set_delayed(); + } } /** @@ -1700,11 +1712,13 @@ int do_adjtimex(struct timex *txc) if (tai != orig_tai) { __timekeeping_set_tai_offset(tk, tai); timekeeping_update(tk, TK_MIRROR | TK_CLOCK_WAS_SET); - clock_was_set_delayed(); } write_seqcount_end(&timekeeper_seq); raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&timekeeper_lock, flags); + if (tai != orig_tai) + clock_was_set(); + ntp_notify_cmos_timer(); return ret;