mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-12-02 08:34:20 +08:00
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>
This commit is contained in:
parent
427b18207a
commit
25f13b4040
@ -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;
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user