Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 21 Jan 2015 16:43:05 -0800 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: rcu, sched: WARNING: CPU: 30 PID: 23771 at kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h:337 rcu_read_unlock_special+0x369/0x550() |
| |
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:44:57AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 01/20/2015 09:57 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >>> So RCU believes that an RCU read-side critical section that ended within > >>> > > an interrupt handler (in this case, an hrtimer) somehow got preempted. > >>> > > Which is not supposed to happen. > >>> > > > >>> > > Do you have CONFIG_PROVE_RCU enabled? If not, could you please enable it > >>> > > and retry? > >> > > >> > I did have CONFIG_PROVE_RCU, and didn't see anything else besides what I pasted here. > > OK, fair enough. I do have a stack of RCU CPU stall-warning changes on > > their way in, please see v3.19-rc1..630181c4a915 in -rcu, which is at: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git > > > > These handle the problems that Dave Jones, yourself, and a few others > > located this past December. Could you please give them a spin? > > They seem to be a part of -next already, so this testing already includes them. > > I seem to be getting them about once a day, anything I can add to debug it?
Could you please try reproducing with the following patch?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
rcu: Improve diagnostics for blocked critical sections in irq
If an RCU read-side critical section occurs within an interrupt handler or a softirq handler, it cannot have been preempted. Therefore, there is a check in rcu_read_unlock_special() checking for this error. However, when this check triggers, it lacks diagnostic information. This commit therefore moves rcu_read_unlock()'s lockdep annotation to follow the call to __rcu_read_unlock() and changes rcu_read_unlock_special()'s WARN_ON_ONCE() to an lockdep_rcu_suspicious() in order to locate where the offending RCU read-side critical section began. In addition, the value of the ->rcu_read_unlock_special field is printed.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h index 3e6afed51051..70b896e16f19 100644 --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h @@ -942,9 +942,9 @@ static inline void rcu_read_unlock(void) { rcu_lockdep_assert(rcu_is_watching(), "rcu_read_unlock() used illegally while idle"); - rcu_lock_release(&rcu_lock_map); __release(RCU); __rcu_read_unlock(); + rcu_lock_release(&rcu_lock_map); /* Keep acq info for rls diags. */ } /** diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h index bb947ef1a2a4..8d2b497b52e9 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h @@ -334,7 +334,13 @@ void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t) } /* Hardware IRQ handlers cannot block, complain if they get here. */ - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(in_irq() || in_serving_softirq())) { + if (in_irq() || in_serving_softirq()) { + lockdep_rcu_suspicious(__FILE__, __LINE__, + "rcu_read_unlock() from irq or softirq with blocking in critical section!!!\n"); + pr_alert("->rcu_read_unlock_special: %#x (b: %d, nq: %d)\n", + t->rcu_read_unlock_special.s, + t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.blocked, + t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.need_qs); local_irq_restore(flags); return; }
| |