Fix incorrect cpu.sleeper accounting #3

SeanTAllen · 2020-06-11T11:34:04Z

Under contention for the CPU lock, you could end up in a scenario where
waiters on the cpu.sem would be awoken earlier than they should have been.

The problem crosses two functions. lkl_cpu_get and lkl_cpu_put:

https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/master/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L95
https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/master/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L113

The handling of "cpu.sleepers" is incorrect. "cpu.sleepers" should be
incremented when a thread is waiting to get the cpu.sem so that in lkl_cpu_put,
it can call sem_up to wake a sleeper if any exists.

However what it is currently doing is in lkl_cpu_get is incrementing the
sleepers thread count every time it can't get the cpu lock.

https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/master/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L102

So, if a thread fails to get the lock more than once it will increment the
count of sleeping threads more than once. This means as it stands, in lkl_cpu_put,
that one thread trying to get the lock several times can account for multiple calls
to sem_up. Given that it is awoken each time in lkl_cpu_get, that is wrong.

The correct logic is to decrement the sleepers count after the sem_down returns in
lkl_cpu_get and not in lkl_cpu_put. That will correctly match up cpu.sleepers with
the number of threads waiting on cpu.sem.

davidchisnall · 2020-06-11T12:00:31Z

arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c

@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ int lkl_cpu_get(void)
 __cpu_try_get_unlock(ret, 0);
 lkl_ops->sem_down(cpu.sem);
 ret = __cpu_try_get_lock(0);
+ cpu.sleepers--;


This doesn't look quite right. cpu.sleepers is protected by the mutex, but you are (non-atomically) decrementing it even if you fail to acquire the lock. If __cpu_try_get_lock fails, this is now a data race.

Its not because the lock hasn't been released yet.

Acquires lock here:

https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/upstream-refactor/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L63

Exits here without unlocking:

https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/upstream-refactor/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L71

It's not til we come back around and do the "try unlock" that it releases the lock:

https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/upstream-refactor/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L82

Quite the code, eh?

Right, __cpu_try_get_lock() always acquires the lock (unless we're shutting down?)

(i.e. thecpu.lock that protects the CPU lock state, not the CPU lock itself.)

After a offline discussion with @davidchisnall, he identified a race condition with sleeper decrement that could happen if the __cpu_try_get_lock call returned -2 which happens on shutdown.

I've pushed an update to address that.

@prp lkl#384 goes away for "surprising result".

I've been having a hard time triggering bugs so, I can say when testing I didnt get any hangs. Not that that means anything was fixed as I was having a hard time triggering hangs anyway.

@SeanTAllen the big question is how this will fare in the CI pipeline, as the pipeline seems to be triggering hangs more consistently. Do you want to create an SGX-LKL PR thats bumps LKL?

There is one's to test.

It had several failures of the sort we've been seeing so there is definitely more to find.

I found this while looking for the "hangs calling umount on shutdown" bug that I've found. I still think the mostly likely cause for that hang is with locks related to lkl_syscall and plan on returning to looking at that more until such time as I have proof that it doesn't exist.

I doubt this would fix that, but I'm not sure.

@prp I'm also going to spend more time looking at the shutdown logic in cpu.c as a number of hangs happen during shutdown. It's complicated code and there might be a bug hiding in there.

Under contention for the CPU lock, you could end up in a scenario where waiters on the cpu.sem would be awoken earlier than they should have been. The problem crosses two functions. lkl_cpu_get and lkl_cpu_put: https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/master/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L95 https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/master/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L113 The handling of "cpu.sleepers" is incorrect. "cpu.sleepers" should be incremented when a thread is waiting to get the cpu.sem so that in lkl_cpu_put, it can call sem_up to wake a sleeper if any exists. However what it is currently doing is in lkl_cpu_get is incrementing the sleepers thread count every time it can't get the cpu lock. https://github.com/lsds/lkl/blob/master/arch/lkl/kernel/cpu.c#L102 So, if a thread fails to get the lock more than once it will increment the count of sleeping threads more than once. This means as it stands, in lkl_cpu_put, that one thread trying to get the lock several times can account for multiple calls to sem_up. Given that it is awoken each time in lkl_cpu_get, that is wrong. The correct logic is to decrement the sleepers count after the sem_down returns in lkl_cpu_get and not in lkl_cpu_put. That will correctly match up cpu.sleepers with the number of threads waiting on cpu.sem.

This PR would be closed if it passes and lsds/lkl#3 is merged at which point a new PR can be opened to bump the lkl version.

SeanTAllen · 2020-06-12T10:12:26Z

@prp @davidchisnall what are next steps with this? does this look ready to merge to you? if yes, I can do that on Monday if its approved. I only have a couple hours of working today before I start moving.

commit 0bd0db4 upstream. The `INSN_CONFIG` comedi instruction with sub-instruction code `INSN_CONFIG_DIGITAL_TRIG` includes a base channel in `data[3]`. This is used as a right shift amount for other bitmask values without being checked. Shift amounts greater than or equal to 32 will result in undefined behavior. Add code to deal with this. Fixes: 33cdce6 ("staging: comedi: addi_apci_1032: conform to new INSN_CONFIG_DIGITAL_TRIG") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> #3.8+ Signed-off-by: Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200717145257.112660-3-abbotti@mev.co.uk Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

commit 926234f upstream. The `INSN_CONFIG` comedi instruction with sub-instruction code `INSN_CONFIG_DIGITAL_TRIG` includes a base channel in `data[3]`. This is used as a right shift amount for other bitmask values without being checked. Shift amounts greater than or equal to 32 will result in undefined behavior. Add code to deal with this. Fixes: 1e15687 ("staging: comedi: addi_apci_1564: add Change-of-State interrupt subdevice and required functions") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> #3.17+ Signed-off-by: Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200717145257.112660-4-abbotti@mev.co.uk Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

commit be6577a upstream. Stalls are quite frequent with recent kernels. I enabled CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR and I caught the following stall: watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 22s! [cc1:22803] CPU: 0 PID: 22803 Comm: cc1 Not tainted 5.6.17+ #3 Hardware name: 9000/800/rp3440 IAOQ[0]: d_alloc_parallel+0x384/0x688 IAOQ[1]: d_alloc_parallel+0x388/0x688 RP(r2): d_alloc_parallel+0x134/0x688 Backtrace: [<000000004036974c>] __lookup_slow+0xa4/0x200 [<0000000040369fc8>] walk_component+0x288/0x458 [<000000004036a9a0>] path_lookupat+0x88/0x198 [<000000004036e748>] filename_lookup+0xa0/0x168 [<000000004036e95c>] user_path_at_empty+0x64/0x80 [<000000004035d93c>] vfs_statx+0x104/0x158 [<000000004035dfcc>] __do_sys_lstat64+0x44/0x80 [<000000004035e5a0>] sys_lstat64+0x20/0x38 [<0000000040180054>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x14 The code was stuck in this loop in d_alloc_parallel: 4037d414: 0e 00 10 dc ldd 0(r16),ret0 4037d418: c7 fc 5f ed bb,< ret0,1f,4037d414 <d_alloc_parallel+0x384> 4037d41c: 08 00 02 40 nop This is the inner loop of bit_spin_lock which is called by hlist_bl_unlock in d_alloc_parallel: static inline void bit_spin_lock(int bitnum, unsigned long *addr) { /* * Assuming the lock is uncontended, this never enters * the body of the outer loop. If it is contended, then * within the inner loop a non-atomic test is used to * busywait with less bus contention for a good time to * attempt to acquire the lock bit. */ preempt_disable(); #if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) while (unlikely(test_and_set_bit_lock(bitnum, addr))) { preempt_enable(); do { cpu_relax(); } while (test_bit(bitnum, addr)); preempt_disable(); } #endif __acquire(bitlock); } After consideration, I realized that we must be losing bit unlocks. Then, I noticed that we missed defining atomic64_set_release(). Adding this define fixes the stalls in bit operations. Signed-off-by: Dave Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

[ Upstream commit e24c644 ] I compiled with AddressSanitizer and I had these memory leaks while I was using the tep_parse_format function: Direct leak of 28 byte(s) in 4 object(s) allocated from: #0 0x7fb07db49ffe in __interceptor_realloc (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libasan.so.5+0x10dffe) #1 0x7fb07a724228 in extend_token /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:985 #2 0x7fb07a724c21 in __read_token /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:1140 #3 0x7fb07a724f78 in read_token /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:1206 #4 0x7fb07a725191 in __read_expect_type /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:1291 #5 0x7fb07a7251df in read_expect_type /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:1299 #6 0x7fb07a72e6c8 in process_dynamic_array_len /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:2849 #7 0x7fb07a7304b8 in process_function /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:3161 #8 0x7fb07a730900 in process_arg_token /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:3207 #9 0x7fb07a727c0b in process_arg /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:1786 #10 0x7fb07a731080 in event_read_print_args /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:3285 lkl#11 0x7fb07a731722 in event_read_print /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:3369 lkl#12 0x7fb07a740054 in __tep_parse_format /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:6335 lkl#13 0x7fb07a74047a in __parse_event /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:6389 lkl#14 0x7fb07a740536 in tep_parse_format /home/pduplessis/repo/linux/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:6431 lkl#15 0x7fb07a785acf in parse_event ../../../src/fs-src/fs.c:251 lkl#16 0x7fb07a785ccd in parse_systems ../../../src/fs-src/fs.c:284 lkl#17 0x7fb07a786fb3 in read_metadata ../../../src/fs-src/fs.c:593 lkl#18 0x7fb07a78760e in ftrace_fs_source_init ../../../src/fs-src/fs.c:727 lkl#19 0x7fb07d90c19c in add_component_with_init_method_data ../../../../src/lib/graph/graph.c:1048 lkl#20 0x7fb07d90c87b in add_source_component_with_initialize_method_data ../../../../src/lib/graph/graph.c:1127 lkl#21 0x7fb07d90c92a in bt_graph_add_source_component ../../../../src/lib/graph/graph.c:1152 lkl#22 0x55db11aa632e in cmd_run_ctx_create_components_from_config_components ../../../src/cli/babeltrace2.c:2252 lkl#23 0x55db11aa6fda in cmd_run_ctx_create_components ../../../src/cli/babeltrace2.c:2347 lkl#24 0x55db11aa780c in cmd_run ../../../src/cli/babeltrace2.c:2461 lkl#25 0x55db11aa8a7d in main ../../../src/cli/babeltrace2.c:2673 lkl#26 0x7fb07d5460b2 in __libc_start_main (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6+0x270b2) The token variable in the process_dynamic_array_len function is allocated in the read_expect_type function, but is not freed before calling the read_token function. Free the token variable before calling read_token in order to plug the leak. Signed-off-by: Philippe Duplessis-Guindon <pduplessis@efficios.com> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-devel/20200730150236.5392-1-pduplessis@efficios.com Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

[ Upstream commit ab0db04 ] When running with -o enospc_debug you can get the following splat if one of the dump_space_info's trip ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.8.0-rc5+ lkl#20 Tainted: G OE ------------------------------------------------------ dd/563090 is trying to acquire lock: ffff9e7dbf4f1e18 (&ctl->tree_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs] but task is already holding lock: ffff9e7e2284d428 (&cache->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_dump_space_info+0xaa/0x120 [btrfs] which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #3 (&cache->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}: _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30 btrfs_add_reserved_bytes+0x3c/0x3c0 [btrfs] find_free_extent+0x7ef/0x13b0 [btrfs] btrfs_reserve_extent+0x9b/0x180 [btrfs] btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0xc1/0x340 [btrfs] alloc_tree_block_no_bg_flush+0x4a/0x60 [btrfs] __btrfs_cow_block+0x122/0x530 [btrfs] btrfs_cow_block+0x106/0x210 [btrfs] commit_cowonly_roots+0x55/0x300 [btrfs] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x4ed/0xac0 [btrfs] sync_filesystem+0x74/0x90 generic_shutdown_super+0x22/0x100 kill_anon_super+0x14/0x30 btrfs_kill_super+0x12/0x20 [btrfs] deactivate_locked_super+0x36/0x70 cleanup_mnt+0x104/0x160 task_work_run+0x5f/0x90 __prepare_exit_to_usermode+0x1bd/0x1c0 do_syscall_64+0x5e/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #2 (&space_info->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}: _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30 btrfs_block_rsv_release+0x1a6/0x3f0 [btrfs] btrfs_inode_rsv_release+0x4f/0x170 [btrfs] btrfs_clear_delalloc_extent+0x155/0x480 [btrfs] clear_state_bit+0x81/0x1a0 [btrfs] __clear_extent_bit+0x25c/0x5d0 [btrfs] clear_extent_bit+0x15/0x20 [btrfs] btrfs_invalidatepage+0x2b7/0x3c0 [btrfs] truncate_cleanup_page+0x47/0xe0 truncate_inode_pages_range+0x238/0x840 truncate_pagecache+0x44/0x60 btrfs_setattr+0x202/0x5e0 [btrfs] notify_change+0x33b/0x490 do_truncate+0x76/0xd0 path_openat+0x687/0xa10 do_filp_open+0x91/0x100 do_sys_openat2+0x215/0x2d0 do_sys_open+0x44/0x80 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #1 (&tree->lock#2){+.+.}-{2:2}: _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30 find_first_extent_bit+0x32/0x150 [btrfs] write_pinned_extent_entries.isra.0+0xc5/0x100 [btrfs] __btrfs_write_out_cache+0x172/0x480 [btrfs] btrfs_write_out_cache+0x7a/0xf0 [btrfs] btrfs_write_dirty_block_groups+0x286/0x3b0 [btrfs] commit_cowonly_roots+0x245/0x300 [btrfs] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x4ed/0xac0 [btrfs] close_ctree+0xf9/0x2f5 [btrfs] generic_shutdown_super+0x6c/0x100 kill_anon_super+0x14/0x30 btrfs_kill_super+0x12/0x20 [btrfs] deactivate_locked_super+0x36/0x70 cleanup_mnt+0x104/0x160 task_work_run+0x5f/0x90 __prepare_exit_to_usermode+0x1bd/0x1c0 do_syscall_64+0x5e/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #0 (&ctl->tree_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}: __lock_acquire+0x1240/0x2460 lock_acquire+0xab/0x360 _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30 btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs] btrfs_dump_space_info+0xf4/0x120 [btrfs] btrfs_reserve_extent+0x176/0x180 [btrfs] __btrfs_prealloc_file_range+0x145/0x550 [btrfs] cache_save_setup+0x28d/0x3b0 [btrfs] btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups+0x1fc/0x4f0 [btrfs] btrfs_commit_transaction+0xcc/0xac0 [btrfs] btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x162/0x4c0 [btrfs] btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0xa0 [btrfs] btrfs_buffered_write.isra.0+0x19b/0x740 [btrfs] btrfs_file_write_iter+0x3cf/0x610 [btrfs] new_sync_write+0x11e/0x1b0 vfs_write+0x1c9/0x200 ksys_write+0x68/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &ctl->tree_lock --> &space_info->lock --> &cache->lock Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(&cache->lock); lock(&space_info->lock); lock(&cache->lock); lock(&ctl->tree_lock); *** DEADLOCK *** 6 locks held by dd/563090: #0: ffff9e7e21d18448 (sb_writers#14){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: vfs_write+0x195/0x200 #1: ffff9e7dd0410ed8 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#19){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_file_write_iter+0x86/0x610 [btrfs] #2: ffff9e7e21d18638 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: start_transaction+0x40b/0x5b0 [btrfs] #3: ffff9e7e1f05d688 (&cur_trans->cache_write_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups+0x158/0x4f0 [btrfs] #4: ffff9e7e2284ddb8 (&space_info->groups_sem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_dump_space_info+0x69/0x120 [btrfs] #5: ffff9e7e2284d428 (&cache->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_dump_space_info+0xaa/0x120 [btrfs] stack backtrace: CPU: 3 PID: 563090 Comm: dd Tainted: G OE 5.8.0-rc5+ lkl#20 Hardware name: To Be Filled By O.E.M. To Be Filled By O.E.M./890FX Deluxe5, BIOS P1.40 05/03/2011 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x96/0xd0 check_noncircular+0x162/0x180 __lock_acquire+0x1240/0x2460 ? wake_up_klogd.part.0+0x30/0x40 lock_acquire+0xab/0x360 ? btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs] _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30 ? btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs] btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs] btrfs_dump_space_info+0xf4/0x120 [btrfs] btrfs_reserve_extent+0x176/0x180 [btrfs] __btrfs_prealloc_file_range+0x145/0x550 [btrfs] ? btrfs_qgroup_reserve_data+0x1d/0x60 [btrfs] cache_save_setup+0x28d/0x3b0 [btrfs] btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups+0x1fc/0x4f0 [btrfs] btrfs_commit_transaction+0xcc/0xac0 [btrfs] ? start_transaction+0xe0/0x5b0 [btrfs] btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x162/0x4c0 [btrfs] btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0xa0 [btrfs] btrfs_buffered_write.isra.0+0x19b/0x740 [btrfs] ? ktime_get_coarse_real_ts64+0xa8/0xd0 ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x1c/0xe0 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x3cf/0x610 [btrfs] new_sync_write+0x11e/0x1b0 vfs_write+0x1c9/0x200 ksys_write+0x68/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 This is because we're holding the block_group->lock while trying to dump the free space cache. However we don't need this lock, we just need it to read the values for the printk, so move the free space cache dumping outside of the block group lock. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

commit 18c850f upstream. There's long existed a lockdep splat because we open our bdev's under the ->device_list_mutex at mount time, which acquires the bd_mutex. Usually this goes unnoticed, but if you do loopback devices at all suddenly the bd_mutex comes with a whole host of other dependencies, which results in the splat when you mount a btrfs file system. ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.8.0-0.rc3.1.fc33.x86_64+debug #1 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ systemd-journal/509 is trying to acquire lock: ffff970831f84db0 (&fs_info->reloc_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x44/0x70 [btrfs] but task is already holding lock: ffff97083144d598 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x59/0x560 [btrfs] which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #6 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}-{0:0}: __sb_start_write+0x13e/0x220 btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x59/0x560 [btrfs] do_page_mkwrite+0x4f/0x130 do_wp_page+0x3b0/0x4f0 handle_mm_fault+0xf47/0x1850 do_user_addr_fault+0x1fc/0x4b0 exc_page_fault+0x88/0x300 asm_exc_page_fault+0x1e/0x30 -> #5 (&mm->mmap_lock#2){++++}-{3:3}: __might_fault+0x60/0x80 _copy_from_user+0x20/0xb0 get_sg_io_hdr+0x9a/0xb0 scsi_cmd_ioctl+0x1ea/0x2f0 cdrom_ioctl+0x3c/0x12b4 sr_block_ioctl+0xa4/0xd0 block_ioctl+0x3f/0x50 ksys_ioctl+0x82/0xc0 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #4 (&cd->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}: __mutex_lock+0x7b/0x820 sr_block_open+0xa2/0x180 __blkdev_get+0xdd/0x550 blkdev_get+0x38/0x150 do_dentry_open+0x16b/0x3e0 path_openat+0x3c9/0xa00 do_filp_open+0x75/0x100 do_sys_openat2+0x8a/0x140 __x64_sys_openat+0x46/0x70 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #3 (&bdev->bd_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __mutex_lock+0x7b/0x820 __blkdev_get+0x6a/0x550 blkdev_get+0x85/0x150 blkdev_get_by_path+0x2c/0x70 btrfs_get_bdev_and_sb+0x1b/0xb0 [btrfs] open_fs_devices+0x88/0x240 [btrfs] btrfs_open_devices+0x92/0xa0 [btrfs] btrfs_mount_root+0x250/0x490 [btrfs] legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x119/0x380 [btrfs] legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 do_mount+0x8c6/0xca0 __x64_sys_mount+0x8e/0xd0 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #2 (&fs_devs->device_list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __mutex_lock+0x7b/0x820 btrfs_run_dev_stats+0x36/0x420 [btrfs] commit_cowonly_roots+0x91/0x2d0 [btrfs] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x4e6/0x9f0 [btrfs] btrfs_sync_file+0x38a/0x480 [btrfs] __x64_sys_fdatasync+0x47/0x80 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #1 (&fs_info->tree_log_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __mutex_lock+0x7b/0x820 btrfs_commit_transaction+0x48e/0x9f0 [btrfs] btrfs_sync_file+0x38a/0x480 [btrfs] __x64_sys_fdatasync+0x47/0x80 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #0 (&fs_info->reloc_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x1241/0x20c0 lock_acquire+0xb0/0x400 __mutex_lock+0x7b/0x820 btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x44/0x70 [btrfs] start_transaction+0xd2/0x500 [btrfs] btrfs_dirty_inode+0x44/0xd0 [btrfs] file_update_time+0xc6/0x120 btrfs_page_mkwrite+0xda/0x560 [btrfs] do_page_mkwrite+0x4f/0x130 do_wp_page+0x3b0/0x4f0 handle_mm_fault+0xf47/0x1850 do_user_addr_fault+0x1fc/0x4b0 exc_page_fault+0x88/0x300 asm_exc_page_fault+0x1e/0x30 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &fs_info->reloc_mutex --> &mm->mmap_lock#2 --> sb_pagefaults Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(sb_pagefaults); lock(&mm->mmap_lock#2); lock(sb_pagefaults); lock(&fs_info->reloc_mutex); *** DEADLOCK *** 3 locks held by systemd-journal/509: #0: ffff97083bdec8b8 (&mm->mmap_lock#2){++++}-{3:3}, at: do_user_addr_fault+0x12e/0x4b0 #1: ffff97083144d598 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x59/0x560 [btrfs] #2: ffff97083144d6a8 (sb_internal){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: start_transaction+0x3f8/0x500 [btrfs] stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 509 Comm: systemd-journal Not tainted 5.8.0-0.rc3.1.fc33.x86_64+debug #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x92/0xc8 check_noncircular+0x134/0x150 __lock_acquire+0x1241/0x20c0 lock_acquire+0xb0/0x400 ? btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x44/0x70 [btrfs] ? lock_acquire+0xb0/0x400 ? btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x44/0x70 [btrfs] __mutex_lock+0x7b/0x820 ? btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x44/0x70 [btrfs] ? kvm_sched_clock_read+0x14/0x30 ? sched_clock+0x5/0x10 ? sched_clock_cpu+0xc/0xb0 btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x44/0x70 [btrfs] start_transaction+0xd2/0x500 [btrfs] btrfs_dirty_inode+0x44/0xd0 [btrfs] file_update_time+0xc6/0x120 btrfs_page_mkwrite+0xda/0x560 [btrfs] ? sched_clock+0x5/0x10 do_page_mkwrite+0x4f/0x130 do_wp_page+0x3b0/0x4f0 handle_mm_fault+0xf47/0x1850 do_user_addr_fault+0x1fc/0x4b0 exc_page_fault+0x88/0x300 ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x8/0x30 asm_exc_page_fault+0x1e/0x30 RIP: 0033:0x7fa3972fdbfe Code: Bad RIP value. Fix this by not holding the ->device_list_mutex at this point. The device_list_mutex exists to protect us from modifying the device list while the file system is running. However it can also be modified by doing a scan on a device. But this action is specifically protected by the uuid_mutex, which we are holding here. We cannot race with opening at this point because we have the ->s_mount lock held during the mount. Not having the ->device_list_mutex here is perfectly safe as we're not going to change the devices at this point. CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.19+ Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> [ add some comments ] Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

SeanTAllen requested review from davidchisnall and prp June 11, 2020 11:34

SeanTAllen mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2020

Test lkl cpu.c bug fix lsds/sgx-lkl#443

Closed

davidchisnall reviewed Jun 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

SeanTAllen mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2020

Possible lkl_cpu_put/lkl_cpu_get problem lsds/sgx-lkl#384

Closed

SeanTAllen force-pushed the seantallen/cpu-sleepers branch from 584d397 to 52964a5 Compare June 11, 2020 12:30

SeanTAllen added a commit to lsds/sgx-lkl that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2020

Test lkl cpu.c bug fix

9e151a7

This PR would be closed if it passes and lsds/lkl#3 is merged at which point a new PR can be opened to bump the lkl version.

davidchisnall approved these changes Jun 12, 2020

View reviewed changes

SeanTAllen merged commit 86819ac into upstream-refactor Jun 15, 2020

SeanTAllen deleted the seantallen/cpu-sleepers branch June 15, 2020 11:08

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix incorrect cpu.sleeper accounting #3

Fix incorrect cpu.sleeper accounting #3

SeanTAllen commented Jun 11, 2020

davidchisnall Jun 11, 2020

SeanTAllen Jun 11, 2020

SeanTAllen Jun 11, 2020

prp Jun 11, 2020

prp Jun 11, 2020

SeanTAllen Jun 11, 2020

SeanTAllen Jun 11, 2020

prp Jun 11, 2020

SeanTAllen Jun 11, 2020

SeanTAllen Jun 11, 2020

SeanTAllen commented Jun 12, 2020

Fix incorrect cpu.sleeper accounting #3

Fix incorrect cpu.sleeper accounting #3

Conversation

SeanTAllen commented Jun 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SeanTAllen commented Jun 12, 2020