diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/workqueue.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | kernel/workqueue.c | 83 |
1 files changed, 69 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c index a86688fabc55..ab3c0dc8c7ed 100644 --- a/kernel/workqueue.c +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c @@ -2091,8 +2091,30 @@ __acquires(&pool->lock) spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock); - lock_map_acquire_read(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map); + lock_map_acquire(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map); lock_map_acquire(&lockdep_map); + /* + * Strictly speaking we should mark the invariant state 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 simply 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. + */ + lockdep_invariant_state(true); trace_workqueue_execute_start(work); worker->current_func(work); /* @@ -2474,7 +2496,16 @@ static void insert_wq_barrier(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, */ INIT_WORK_ONSTACK(&barr->work, wq_barrier_func); __set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, work_data_bits(&barr->work)); - init_completion(&barr->done); + + /* + * Explicitly init the crosslock for wq_barrier::done, make its lock + * key a subkey of the corresponding work. As a result we won't + * build a dependency between wq_barrier::done and unrelated work. + */ + lockdep_init_map_crosslock((struct lockdep_map *)&barr->done.map, + "(complete)wq_barr::done", + target->lockdep_map.key, 1); + __init_completion(&barr->done); barr->task = current; /* @@ -2815,16 +2846,18 @@ static bool start_flush_work(struct work_struct *work, struct wq_barrier *barr) spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock); /* - * If @max_active is 1 or rescuer is in use, flushing another work - * item on the same workqueue may lead to deadlock. Make sure the - * flusher is not running on the same workqueue by verifying write - * access. + * Force a lock recursion deadlock when using flush_work() inside a + * single-threaded or rescuer equipped workqueue. + * + * For single threaded workqueues the deadlock happens when the work + * is after the work issuing the flush_work(). For rescuer equipped + * workqueues the deadlock happens when the rescuer stalls, blocking + * forward progress. */ - if (pwq->wq->saved_max_active == 1 || pwq->wq->rescuer) + if (pwq->wq->saved_max_active == 1 || pwq->wq->rescuer) { lock_map_acquire(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map); - else - lock_map_acquire_read(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map); - lock_map_release(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map); + lock_map_release(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map); + } return true; already_gone: @@ -3577,6 +3610,13 @@ static bool wq_calc_node_cpumask(const struct workqueue_attrs *attrs, int node, /* yeap, return possible CPUs in @node that @attrs wants */ cpumask_and(cpumask, attrs->cpumask, wq_numa_possible_cpumask[node]); + + if (cpumask_empty(cpumask)) { + pr_warn_once("WARNING: workqueue cpumask: online intersect > " + "possible intersect\n"); + return false; + } + return !cpumask_equal(cpumask, attrs->cpumask); use_dfl: @@ -3744,8 +3784,12 @@ static int apply_workqueue_attrs_locked(struct workqueue_struct *wq, return -EINVAL; /* creating multiple pwqs breaks ordering guarantee */ - if (WARN_ON((wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) && !list_empty(&wq->pwqs))) - return -EINVAL; + if (!list_empty(&wq->pwqs)) { + if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT)) + return -EINVAL; + + wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED; + } ctx = apply_wqattrs_prepare(wq, attrs); if (!ctx) @@ -3929,6 +3973,16 @@ struct workqueue_struct *__alloc_workqueue_key(const char *fmt, struct workqueue_struct *wq; struct pool_workqueue *pwq; + /* + * Unbound && max_active == 1 used to imply ordered, which is no + * longer the case on NUMA machines due to per-node pools. While + * alloc_ordered_workqueue() is the right way to create an ordered + * workqueue, keep the previous behavior to avoid subtle breakages + * on NUMA. + */ + if ((flags & WQ_UNBOUND) && max_active == 1) + flags |= __WQ_ORDERED; + /* see the comment above the definition of WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT */ if ((flags & WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT) && wq_power_efficient) flags |= WQ_UNBOUND; @@ -4119,13 +4173,14 @@ void workqueue_set_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int max_active) struct pool_workqueue *pwq; /* disallow meddling with max_active for ordered workqueues */ - if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED)) + if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT)) return; max_active = wq_clamp_max_active(max_active, wq->flags, wq->name); mutex_lock(&wq->mutex); + wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED; wq->saved_max_active = max_active; for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) @@ -5253,7 +5308,7 @@ int workqueue_sysfs_register(struct workqueue_struct *wq) * attributes breaks ordering guarantee. Disallow exposing ordered * workqueues. */ - if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED)) + if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT)) return -EINVAL; wq->wq_dev = wq_dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*wq_dev), GFP_KERNEL); |