Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:01:30 +0000 | From | Andrew Price <> | Subject | Re: rcu: fix hlist_bl_set_first_rcu annotation |
| |
Hi,
On 03/02/13 18:39, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 07:07:57PM +0000, Steven Whitehouse wrote: >> >> Abhi noticed that we were getting a complaint from the RCU subsystem >> about access of an RCU protected list under the write side bit lock. >> This patch adds additional annotation to check both the RCU read >> lock and the write side bit lock before printing a message. >> >> Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com> >> Reported-by: Abhijith Das <adas@redhat.com> >> Tested-by: Abhijith Das <adas@redhat.com> > > Looks plausible to me on first glance, copying Nick Piggin and Christoph > Hellwig. If they have no objections, I will queue this. > > Thanx, Paul
Has this had any attention yet? I'm also seeing the complaint quite frequently:
[ 68.738811] =============================== [ 68.741380] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ] [ 68.748785] 3.8.0-0.rc7.git1.1.fc19.x86_64 #1 Not tainted [ 68.750841] ------------------------------- [ 68.752418] include/linux/rculist_bl.h:23 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage! [ 68.755264] [ 68.755264] other info that might help us debug this: [ 68.755264] [ 68.758030] [ 68.758030] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0 [ 68.760316] 1 lock held by mount/476: [ 68.761896] #0: (&type->s_umount_key#38/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811dbbee>] sget+0x39e/0x670 [ 68.767115] [ 68.767115] stack backtrace: [ 68.769529] Pid: 476, comm: mount Not tainted 3.8.0-0.rc7.git1.1.fc19.x86_64 #1 [ 68.772095] Call Trace: [ 68.772995] [<ffffffff810d73b7>] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xe7/0x120 [ 68.775184] [<ffffffffa00e3238>] search_bucket+0x118/0x160 [gfs2] [ 68.777559] [<ffffffffa00e47c3>] gfs2_glock_get+0x603/0x7b0 [gfs2] [ 68.780749] [<ffffffffa00e41c5>] ? gfs2_glock_get+0x5/0x7b0 [gfs2] [ 68.784173] [<ffffffffa00e6db9>] gfs2_glock_nq_num+0x29/0x90 [gfs2] [ 68.786551] [<ffffffffa00f2b79>] gfs2_mount+0x869/0xf30 [gfs2] [ 68.788672] [<ffffffff810ad428>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0xa8/0x100 [ 68.790739] [<ffffffff810d561d>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10 [ 68.793042] [<ffffffff810ad56f>] ? local_clock+0x5f/0x70 [ 68.794940] [<ffffffff81702500>] ? __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x80/0x170 [ 68.798236] [<ffffffff811dcb49>] mount_fs+0x39/0x1b0 [ 68.800409] [<ffffffff811879c0>] ? __alloc_percpu+0x10/0x20 [ 68.803692] [<ffffffff811fa8e3>] vfs_kern_mount+0x63/0xf0 [ 68.806773] [<ffffffff811fcfb5>] do_mount+0x205/0xa90 [ 68.809669] [<ffffffff8118c8ec>] ? might_fault+0x5c/0xb0 [ 68.812717] [<ffffffff811819fb>] ? strndup_user+0x4b/0xf0 [ 68.816066] [<ffffffff811fd8c3>] sys_mount+0x83/0xc0 [ 68.818284] [<ffffffff8170ead9>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
It would be good to have this silenced for 3.8 but I think there's not long to go.
Thanks, Andy
>> diff --git a/include/linux/list_bl.h b/include/linux/list_bl.h >> index 31f9d75..2eb8855 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/list_bl.h >> +++ b/include/linux/list_bl.h >> @@ -125,6 +125,11 @@ static inline void hlist_bl_unlock(struct hlist_bl_head *b) >> __bit_spin_unlock(0, (unsigned long *)b); >> } >> >> +static inline bool hlist_bl_is_locked(struct hlist_bl_head *b) >> +{ >> + return bit_spin_is_locked(0, (unsigned long *)b); >> +} >> + >> /** >> * hlist_bl_for_each_entry - iterate over list of given type >> * @tpos: the type * to use as a loop cursor. >> diff --git a/include/linux/rculist_bl.h b/include/linux/rculist_bl.h >> index cf1244f..4f216c5 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/rculist_bl.h >> +++ b/include/linux/rculist_bl.h >> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ static inline void hlist_bl_set_first_rcu(struct hlist_bl_head *h, >> static inline struct hlist_bl_node *hlist_bl_first_rcu(struct hlist_bl_head *h) >> { >> return (struct hlist_bl_node *) >> - ((unsigned long)rcu_dereference(h->first) & ~LIST_BL_LOCKMASK); >> + ((unsigned long)rcu_dereference_check(h->first, hlist_bl_is_locked(h)) & ~LIST_BL_LOCKMASK); >> } >> >> /** >> >>
| |