GitHub-Mirror/Star64_linux
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/Fishwaldo/Star64_linux.git synced 2025-06-20 05:31:15 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

locking/lockdep: Fix workqueue crossrelease annotation

Browse source 
The new completion/crossrelease annotations interact unfavourable with
the extant flush_work()/flush_workqueue() annotations.

The problem is that when a single work class does:

  wait_for_completion(&C)

and

  complete(&C)

in different executions, we'll build dependencies like:

  lock_map_acquire(W)
  complete_acquire(C)

and

  lock_map_acquire(W)
  complete_release(C)

which results in the dependency chain: W->C->W, which lockdep thinks
spells deadlock, even though there is no deadlock potential since
works are ran concurrently.

One possibility would be to change the work 'lock' to recursive-read,
but that would mean hitting a lockdep limitation on recursive locks.
Also, unconditinoally switching to recursive-read here would fail to
detect the actual deadlock on single-threaded workqueues, which do
have a problem with this.

For now, forcefully disregard these locks for crossrelease.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: boqun.feng@gmail.com
Cc: byungchul.park@lge.com
Cc: david@fromorbit.com
Cc: johannes@sipsolutions.net
Cc: oleg@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
Peter Zijlstra 2017-08-23 13:23:30 +02:00 • committed by Ingo Molnar
parent a1d14934ea
commit e6f3faa734
4 changed files with 66 additions and 27 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

23
kernel/workqueue.c
View file

@ -2093,7 +2093,28 @@ __acquires(&pool->lock)
lock_map_acquire(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map);
lock_map_acquire(&lockdep_map);
crossrelease_hist_start(XHLOCK_PROC);
/*
* Strictly speaking we should do start(PROC) without holding any
* locks, that is, before these two lock_map_acquire()'s.
*
* However, that would result in:
*
* A(W1)
* WFC(C)
* A(W1)
* C(C)
*
* Which would create W1->C->W1 dependencies, even though there is no
* actual deadlock possible. There are two solutions, using a
* read-recursive acquire on the work(queue) 'locks', but this will then
* hit the lockdep limitation on recursive locks, or simly discard
* these locks.
*
* AFAICT there is no possible deadlock scenario between the
* flush_work() and complete() primitives (except for single-threaded
* workqueues), so hiding them isn't a problem.
*/
crossrelease_hist_start(XHLOCK_PROC, true);
trace_workqueue_execute_start(work);
worker->current_func(work);
/*