perf: Fix perf_lock_task_context() vs RCU
Jiri managed to trigger this warning: [] ====================================================== [] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] [] 3.10.0+ #228 Tainted: G W [] ------------------------------------------------------- [] p/6613 is trying to acquire lock: [] (rcu_node_0){..-...}, at: [<ffffffff810ca797>] rcu_read_unlock_special+0xa7/0x250 [] [] but task is already holding lock: [] (&ctx->lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff810f2879>] perf_lock_task_context+0xd9/0x2c0 [] [] which lock already depends on the new lock. [] [] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: [] [] -> #4 (&ctx->lock){-.-...}: [] -> #3 (&rq->lock){-.-.-.}: [] -> #2 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.-.}: [] -> #1 (&rnp->nocb_gp_wq[1]){......}: [] -> #0 (rcu_node_0){..-...}: Paul was quick to explain that due to preemptible RCU we cannot call rcu_read_unlock() while holding scheduler (or nested) locks when part of the read side critical section was preemptible. Therefore solve it by making the entire RCU read side non-preemptible. Also pull out the retry from under the non-preempt to play nice with RT. Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> Helped-out-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: <stable@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
06f417968b
commit
058ebd0eba
1 changed files with 14 additions and 1 deletions
|
@ -947,8 +947,18 @@ perf_lock_task_context(struct task_struct *task, int ctxn, unsigned long *flags)
|
|||
{
|
||||
struct perf_event_context *ctx;
|
||||
|
||||
rcu_read_lock();
|
||||
retry:
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* One of the few rules of preemptible RCU is that one cannot do
|
||||
* rcu_read_unlock() while holding a scheduler (or nested) lock when
|
||||
* part of the read side critical section was preemptible -- see
|
||||
* rcu_read_unlock_special().
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Since ctx->lock nests under rq->lock we must ensure the entire read
|
||||
* side critical section is non-preemptible.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
preempt_disable();
|
||||
rcu_read_lock();
|
||||
ctx = rcu_dereference(task->perf_event_ctxp[ctxn]);
|
||||
if (ctx) {
|
||||
/*
|
||||
|
@ -964,6 +974,8 @@ perf_lock_task_context(struct task_struct *task, int ctxn, unsigned long *flags)
|
|||
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&ctx->lock, *flags);
|
||||
if (ctx != rcu_dereference(task->perf_event_ctxp[ctxn])) {
|
||||
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ctx->lock, *flags);
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
preempt_enable();
|
||||
goto retry;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -973,6 +985,7 @@ perf_lock_task_context(struct task_struct *task, int ctxn, unsigned long *flags)
|
|||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
preempt_enable();
|
||||
return ctx;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue