mbox series

[00/15] timers: Provide timer_shutdown[_sync]()

Message ID 20221115195802.415956561@linutronix.de
Headers show
Series timers: Provide timer_shutdown[_sync]() | expand

Message

Thomas Gleixner Nov. 15, 2022, 8:28 p.m. UTC
Tearing down timers can be tedious when there are circular dependencies to
other things which need to be torn down. A prime example is timer and
workqueue where the timer schedules work and the work arms the timer.

Steven and the Google Chromebook team ran into such an issue in the
Bluetooth HCI code.

Steven suggested to create a new function del_timer_free() which marks the
timer as shutdown. Rearm attempts of shutdown timers are discarded and he
wanted to emit a warning for that case:

   https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220407161745.7d6754b3@gandalf.local.home

This resulted in a lengthy discussion and suggestions how this should be
implemented. The patch series went through several iterations and during
the review of the last version it turned out that this approach is
suboptimal:

   https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221110064101.429013735@goodmis.org

The warning is not really helpful because it's entirely unclear how it
should be acted upon. The only way to address such a case is to add 'if
(in_shutdown)' conditionals all over the place. This is error prone and in
most cases of teardown like the HCI one which started this discussion not
required all.

What needs to prevented is that pending work which is drained via
destroy_workqueue() does not rearm the previously shutdown timer. Nothing
in that shutdown sequence relies on the timer being functional.

The conclusion was that the semantics of timer_shutdown_sync() should be:

    - timer is not enqueued
    - timer callback is not running
    - timer cannot be rearmed

Preventing the rearming of shutdown timers is done by discarding rearm
attempts silently.

As Steven is short of cycles, I made some spare cycles available and
reworked the patch series to follow the new semantics and plugged the races
which were discovered during review.

The patches have been split up into small pieces to make review easier and
I took the liberty to throw a bunch of overdue cleanups into the picture
instead of proliferating the existing state further.

The last patch in the series addresses the HCI teardown issue for real.

The series is also available from git:

   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/devel.git timers

Thanks,

	tglx
---
 Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.rst |    2 
 Documentation/core-api/local_ops.rst                   |    2 
 Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst               |   13 
 arch/arm/mach-spear/time.c                             |    8 
 drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c                            |   10 
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm-dev-common.c                      |    4 
 drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c                   |   12 
 drivers/clocksource/timer-sp804.c                      |    6 
 drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x_usb.c                  |    4 
 drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2usb.c                    |    6 
 include/linux/timer.h                                  |   35 +
 kernel/time/timer.c                                    |  409 +++++++++++++----
 net/sunrpc/xprt.c                                      |    2 
 13 files changed, 383 insertions(+), 130 deletions(-)

Comments

Thomas Gleixner Nov. 21, 2022, 3:15 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Nov 15 2022 at 21:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> As Steven is short of cycles, I made some spare cycles available and
> reworked the patch series to follow the new semantics and plugged the races
> which were discovered during review.

Any opinions on this pile or should I just declare it's perfect and
queue it for 6.2?

Thanks,

        tglx
Steven Rostedt Nov. 21, 2022, 3:26 p.m. UTC | #2
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:15:00 +0100
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:

> > As Steven is short of cycles, I made some spare cycles available and
> > reworked the patch series to follow the new semantics and plugged the races
> > which were discovered during review.  
> 
> Any opinions on this pile or should I just declare it's perfect and
> queue it for 6.2?

I have time cut out of today to go over it. Thanks Thomas,

-- Steve
Steven Rostedt Nov. 22, 2022, 2:38 a.m. UTC | #3
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 21:28:32 +0100 (CET)
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:

> The patches have been split up into small pieces to make review easier and
> I took the liberty to throw a bunch of overdue cleanups into the picture
> instead of proliferating the existing state further.

After applying all these patches, and then my updates to the rest of
the kernel, as well as my update to the debug objects to require
shutdown. It reported this was needed:

-- Steve

diff --git a/kernel/time/timer.c b/kernel/time/timer.c
index 0fbb71950ca2..3e84a2621913 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timer.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
@@ -2188,7 +2188,7 @@ signed long __sched schedule_timeout(signed long timeout)
 	timer_setup_on_stack(&timer.timer, process_timeout, 0);
 	__mod_timer(&timer.timer, expire, MOD_TIMER_NOTPENDING);
 	schedule();
-	del_timer_sync(&timer.timer);
+	timer_shutdown_sync(&timer.timer);
 
 	/* Remove the timer from the object tracker */
 	destroy_timer_on_stack(&timer.timer);