diff options
author | Nicolai Hähnle <Nicolai.Haehnle@amd.com> | 2016-12-21 19:46:37 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2017-01-14 11:14:51 +0100 |
commit | 25f13b4040b68dfc5a2a22e7234894e718e3f4c5 (patch) | |
tree | 61365963e24cb9a5970b07e8133aa9ad0a12e406 /kernel/locking | |
parent | 427b18207a87f6306bd53a74e03dbe17392b0045 (diff) | |
download | blackbird-op-linux-25f13b4040b68dfc5a2a22e7234894e718e3f4c5.tar.gz blackbird-op-linux-25f13b4040b68dfc5a2a22e7234894e718e3f4c5.zip |
locking/ww_mutex: Re-check ww->ctx in the inner optimistic spin loop
In the following scenario, thread #1 should back off its attempt to lock
ww1 and unlock ww2 (assuming the acquire context stamps are ordered
accordingly).
Thread #0 Thread #1
--------- ---------
successfully lock ww2
set ww1->base.owner
attempt to lock ww1
confirm ww1->ctx == NULL
enter mutex_spin_on_owner
set ww1->ctx
What was likely to happen previously is:
attempt to lock ww2
refuse to spin because
ww2->ctx != NULL
schedule()
detect thread #0 is off CPU
stop optimistic spin
return -EDEADLK
unlock ww2
wakeup thread #0
lock ww2
Now, we are more likely to see:
detect ww1->ctx != NULL
stop optimistic spin
return -EDEADLK
unlock ww2
successfully lock ww2
... because thread #1 will stop its optimistic spin as soon as possible.
The whole scenario is quite unlikely, since it requires thread #1 to get
between thread #0 setting the owner and setting the ctx. But since we're
idling here anyway, the additional check is basically free.
Found by inspection.
Signed-off-by: Nicolai Hähnle <Nicolai.Haehnle@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@mblankhorst.nl>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1482346000-9927-10-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/locking')
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/locking/mutex.c | 49 |
1 files changed, 29 insertions, 20 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c index 43ff6110014c..41b0406069e8 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c @@ -372,11 +372,14 @@ ww_mutex_set_context_slowpath(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx) #ifdef CONFIG_MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER /* - * Look out! "owner" is an entirely speculative pointer - * access and not reliable. + * Look out! "owner" is an entirely speculative pointer access and not + * reliable. + * + * "noinline" so that this function shows up on perf profiles. */ static noinline -bool mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct task_struct *owner) +bool mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct task_struct *owner, + struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx) { bool ret = true; @@ -399,6 +402,28 @@ bool mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct task_struct *owner) break; } + if (ww_ctx && ww_ctx->acquired > 0) { + struct ww_mutex *ww; + + ww = container_of(lock, struct ww_mutex, base); + + /* + * If ww->ctx is set the contents are undefined, only + * by acquiring wait_lock there is a guarantee that + * they are not invalid when reading. + * + * As such, when deadlock detection needs to be + * performed the optimistic spinning cannot be done. + * + * Check this in every inner iteration because we may + * be racing against another thread's ww_mutex_lock. + */ + if (READ_ONCE(ww->ctx)) { + ret = false; + break; + } + } + cpu_relax(); } rcu_read_unlock(); @@ -484,22 +509,6 @@ mutex_optimistic_spin(struct mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx, for (;;) { struct task_struct *owner; - if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx && ww_ctx->acquired > 0) { - struct ww_mutex *ww; - - ww = container_of(lock, struct ww_mutex, base); - /* - * If ww->ctx is set the contents are undefined, only - * by acquiring wait_lock there is a guarantee that - * they are not invalid when reading. - * - * As such, when deadlock detection needs to be - * performed the optimistic spinning cannot be done. - */ - if (READ_ONCE(ww->ctx)) - goto fail_unlock; - } - /* Try to acquire the mutex... */ owner = __mutex_trylock_or_owner(lock); if (!owner) @@ -509,7 +518,7 @@ mutex_optimistic_spin(struct mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx, * There's an owner, wait for it to either * release the lock or go to sleep. */ - if (!mutex_spin_on_owner(lock, owner)) + if (!mutex_spin_on_owner(lock, owner, ww_ctx)) goto fail_unlock; /* |