From 9dcfe2c75b51f454f39c2de4756e841228865b47 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ingo Molnar Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:25:55 +0100 Subject: locking/refcounts: Change WARN() to WARN_ONCE() Linus noticed that the new refcount.h APIs used WARN(), which would turn into a dmesg DoS if it triggers frequently on some buggy driver. So make sure we only warn once. These warnings are never supposed to happen, so it's typically not a problem to lose subsequent warnings. Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Elena Reshetova Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+55aFzbYUTZ=oqZ2YgDjY0C2_n6ODhTfqj6V+m5xWmDxsuB0w@mail.gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- lib/refcount.c | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/refcount.c b/lib/refcount.c index 1d33366189d1..aa09ad3c30b0 100644 --- a/lib/refcount.c +++ b/lib/refcount.c @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ bool refcount_add_not_zero(unsigned int i, refcount_t *r) val = old; } - WARN(new == UINT_MAX, "refcount_t: saturated; leaking memory.\n"); + WARN_ONCE(new == UINT_MAX, "refcount_t: saturated; leaking memory.\n"); return true; } @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(refcount_add_not_zero); void refcount_add(unsigned int i, refcount_t *r) { - WARN(!refcount_add_not_zero(i, r), "refcount_t: addition on 0; use-after-free.\n"); + WARN_ONCE(!refcount_add_not_zero(i, r), "refcount_t: addition on 0; use-after-free.\n"); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(refcount_add); @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ bool refcount_inc_not_zero(refcount_t *r) val = old; } - WARN(new == UINT_MAX, "refcount_t: saturated; leaking memory.\n"); + WARN_ONCE(new == UINT_MAX, "refcount_t: saturated; leaking memory.\n"); return true; } @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(refcount_inc_not_zero); */ void refcount_inc(refcount_t *r) { - WARN(!refcount_inc_not_zero(r), "refcount_t: increment on 0; use-after-free.\n"); + WARN_ONCE(!refcount_inc_not_zero(r), "refcount_t: increment on 0; use-after-free.\n"); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(refcount_inc); @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ bool refcount_sub_and_test(unsigned int i, refcount_t *r) new = val - i; if (new > val) { - WARN(new > val, "refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.\n"); + WARN_ONCE(new > val, "refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.\n"); return false; } @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(refcount_dec_and_test); void refcount_dec(refcount_t *r) { - WARN(refcount_dec_and_test(r), "refcount_t: decrement hit 0; leaking memory.\n"); + WARN_ONCE(refcount_dec_and_test(r), "refcount_t: decrement hit 0; leaking memory.\n"); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(refcount_dec); @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ bool refcount_dec_not_one(refcount_t *r) new = val - 1; if (new > val) { - WARN(new > val, "refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.\n"); + WARN_ONCE(new > val, "refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.\n"); return true; } -- cgit v1.2.3 From 2b232e0c3b3a09f3e33750aa20e314f1b80e5361 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chris Wilson Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:40:11 +0000 Subject: locking/ww_mutex: Replace cpu_relax() with cond_resched() for tests When busy-spinning on a ww_mutex_trylock(), we depend upon the other thread advancing and releasing the lock. This can not happen on a single CPU unless we relinquish it: [ ] NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 22s! [kworker/0:1:18] ... [ ] Call Trace: [ ] mutex_trylock() [ ] test_mutex_work+0x31/0x56 [ ] process_one_work+0x1b4/0x2f9 [ ] worker_thread+0x1b0/0x27c [ ] kthread+0xd1/0xd3 [ ] ret_from_fork+0x19/0x30 Reported-by: Fengguang Wu Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Fixes: f2a5fec17395 ("locking/ww_mutex: Begin kselftests for ww_mutex") Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170228094011.2595-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c b/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c index da6c9a34f62f..3eb39c588397 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c +++ b/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static void test_mutex_work(struct work_struct *work) if (mtx->flags & TEST_MTX_TRY) { while (!ww_mutex_trylock(&mtx->mutex)) - cpu_relax(); + cond_resched(); } else { ww_mutex_lock(&mtx->mutex, NULL); } @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static int __test_mutex(unsigned int flags) ret = -EINVAL; break; } - cpu_relax(); + cond_resched(); } while (time_before(jiffies, timeout)); } else { ret = wait_for_completion_timeout(&mtx.done, TIMEOUT); -- cgit v1.2.3 From 7fb4a2cea6b18dab56d609530d077f168169ed6b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 16:23:30 +0100 Subject: locking/lockdep: Add nest_lock integrity test MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Boqun reported that hlock->references can overflow. Add a debug test for that to generate a clear error when this happens. Without this, lockdep is likely to report a mysterious failure on unlock. Reported-by: Boqun Feng Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Chris Wilson Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Nicolai Hähnle Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c index 9812e5dd409e..c0ee8607c11e 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c @@ -3260,10 +3260,17 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, if (depth) { hlock = curr->held_locks + depth - 1; if (hlock->class_idx == class_idx && nest_lock) { - if (hlock->references) + if (hlock->references) { + /* + * Check: unsigned int references:12, overflow. + */ + if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(hlock->references == (1 << 12)-1)) + return 0; + hlock->references++; - else + } else { hlock->references = 2; + } return 1; } -- cgit v1.2.3 From 857811a37129f5d2ba162d7be3986eff44724014 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Boqun Feng Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 23:01:38 +0800 Subject: locking/ww_mutex: Adjust the lock number for stress test MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Because there are only 12 bits in held_lock::references, so we only support 4095 nested lock held in the same time, adjust the lock number for ww_mutex stress test to kill one lockdep splat: [ ] [ BUG: bad unlock balance detected! ] [ ] kworker/u2:0/5 is trying to release lock (ww_class_mutex) at: [ ] ww_mutex_unlock() [ ] but there are no more locks to release! ... Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Chris Wilson Cc: Fengguang Wu Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Nicolai Hähnle Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170301150138.hdixnmafzfsox7nn@tardis.cn.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c b/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c index 3eb39c588397..6b7abb334ca6 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c +++ b/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c @@ -627,7 +627,7 @@ static int __init test_ww_mutex_init(void) if (ret) return ret; - ret = stress(4096, hweight32(STRESS_ALL)*ncpus, 1<<12, STRESS_ALL); + ret = stress(4095, hweight32(STRESS_ALL)*ncpus, 1<<12, STRESS_ALL); if (ret) return ret; -- cgit v1.2.3