page_pool: add a lockdep check for recycling in hardirq

Page pool use in hardirq is prohibited, add debug checks
to catch misuses. IIRC we previously discussed using
DEBUG_NET_WARN_ON_ONCE() for thi

page_pool: add a lockdep check for recycling in hardirq

Page pool use in hardirq is prohibited, add debug checks
to catch misuses. IIRC we previously discussed using
DEBUG_NET_WARN_ON_ONCE() for this, but there were concerns
that people will have DEBUG_NET enabled in perf testing.
I don't think anyone enables lockdep in perf testing,
so use lockdep to avoid pushback and arguing :)

Acked-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230804180529.2483231-6-aleksander.lobakin@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>

show more ...

lockdep: Add lock_set_cmp_fn() annotation

This implements a new interface to lockdep, lock_set_cmp_fn(), for
defining a custom ordering when taking multiple locks of the same
class.

This is an alte

lockdep: Add lock_set_cmp_fn() annotation

This implements a new interface to lockdep, lock_set_cmp_fn(), for
defining a custom ordering when taking multiple locks of the same
class.

This is an alternative to subclasses, but can not fully replace them
since subclasses allow lock hierarchies with other clasees
inter-twined, while this relies on pure class nesting.

Specifically, if A is our nesting class then:

A/0 <- B <- A/1

Would be a valid lock order with subclasses (each subclass really is a
full class from the validation PoV) but not with this annotation,
which requires all nesting to be consecutive.

Example output:

| ============================================
| WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
| 6.2.0-rc8-00003-g7d81e591ca6a-dirty #15 Not tainted
| --------------------------------------------
| kworker/14:3/938 is trying to acquire lock:
| ffff8880143218c8 (&b->lock l=0 0:2803368){++++}-{3:3}, at: bch_btree_node_get.part.0+0x81/0x2b0
|
| but task is already holding lock:
| ffff8880143de8c8 (&b->lock l=1 1048575:9223372036854775807){++++}-{3:3}, at: __bch_btree_map_nodes+0xea/0x1e0
| and the lock comparison function returns 1:
|
| other info that might help us debug this:
| Possible unsafe locking scenario:
|
| CPU0
| ----
| lock(&b->lock l=1 1048575:9223372036854775807);
| lock(&b->lock l=0 0:2803368);
|
| *** DEADLOCK ***
|
| May be due to missing lock nesting notation
|
| 3 locks held by kworker/14:3/938:
| #0: ffff888005ea9d38 ((wq_completion)bcache){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1ec/0x530
| #1: ffff8880098c3e70 ((work_completion)(&cl->work)#3){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1ec/0x530
| #2: ffff8880143de8c8 (&b->lock l=1 1048575:9223372036854775807){++++}-{3:3}, at: __bch_btree_map_nodes+0xea/0x1e0

[peterz: extended changelog]
Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230509195847.1745548-1-kent.overstreet@linux.dev

show more ...

debugobjects,locking: Annotate debug_object_fill_pool() wait type violation

There is an explicit wait-type violation in debug_object_fill_pool()
for PREEMPT_RT=n kernels which allows them to more ea

debugobjects,locking: Annotate debug_object_fill_pool() wait type violation

There is an explicit wait-type violation in debug_object_fill_pool()
for PREEMPT_RT=n kernels which allows them to more easily fill the
object pool and reduce the chance of allocation failures.

Lockdep's wait-type checks are designed to check the PREEMPT_RT
locking rules even for PREEMPT_RT=n kernels and object to this, so
create a lockdep annotation to allow this to stand.

Specifically, create a 'lock' type that overrides the inner wait-type
while it is held -- allowing one to temporarily raise it, such that
the violation is hidden.

Reported-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Reported-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230429100614.GA1489784@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Improve the deadlock scenario print for sync and read lock

Lock scenario print is always a weak spot of lockdep splats. Improvement
can be made if we rework the dependency search an

locking/lockdep: Improve the deadlock scenario print for sync and read lock

Lock scenario print is always a weak spot of lockdep splats. Improvement
can be made if we rework the dependency search and the error printing.

However without touching the graph search, we can improve a little for
the circular deadlock case, since we have the to-be-added lock
dependency, and know whether these two locks are read/write/sync.

In order to know whether a held_lock is sync or not, a bit was
"stolen" from ->references, which reduce our limit for the same lock
class nesting from 2^12 to 2^11, and it should still be good enough.

Besides, since we now have bit in held_lock for sync, we don't need the
"hardirqoffs being 1" trick, and also we can avoid the __lock_release()
if we jump out of __lock_acquire() before the held_lock stored.

With these changes, a deadlock case evolved with read lock and sync gets
a better print-out from:

[...] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[...]
[...] CPU0 CPU1
[...] ---- ----
[...] lock(srcuA);
[...] lock(srcuB);
[...] lock(srcuA);
[...] lock(srcuB);

to

[...] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[...]
[...] CPU0 CPU1
[...] ---- ----
[...] rlock(srcuA);
[...] lock(srcuB);
[...] lock(srcuA);
[...] sync(srcuB);

Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Introduce lock_sync()

Currently, functions like synchronize_srcu() do not have lockdep
annotations resembling those of other write-side locking primitives.
Such annotations might lo

locking/lockdep: Introduce lock_sync()

Currently, functions like synchronize_srcu() do not have lockdep
annotations resembling those of other write-side locking primitives.
Such annotations might look as follows:

lock_acquire();
lock_release();

Such annotations would tell lockdep that synchronize_srcu() acts like
an empty critical section that waits for other (read-side) critical
sections to finish. This would definitely catch some deadlock, but
as pointed out by Paul Mckenney [1], this could also introduce false
positives because of irq-safe/unsafe detection. Of course, there are
tricks could help with this:

might_sleep(); // Existing statement in __synchronize_srcu().
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING)) {
local_irq_disable();
lock_acquire();
lock_release();
local_irq_enable();
}

But it would be better for lockdep to provide a separate annonation for
functions like synchronize_srcu(), so that people won't need to repeat
the ugly tricks above.

Therefore introduce lock_sync(), which is simply an lock+unlock
pair with no irq safe/unsafe deadlock check. This works because the
to-be-annontated functions do not create real critical sections, and
there is therefore no way that irq can create extra dependencies.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180412021233.ewncg5jjuzjw3x62@tardis/

Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
[ boqun: Fix typos reported by Davidlohr Bueso and Paul E. Mckenney ]
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Remove lockdep_init_map_crosslock.

The cross-release bits have been removed, lockdep_init_map_crosslock() is
a leftover.

Remove lockdep_init_map_crosslock.

Signed-off-by: Sebastia

locking/lockdep: Remove lockdep_init_map_crosslock.

The cross-release bits have been removed, lockdep_init_map_crosslock() is
a leftover.

Remove lockdep_init_map_crosslock.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220311164457.46461-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/YqITgY+2aPITu96z@linutronix.de

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Fix lockdep_init_map_*() confusion

Commit dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t") added yet
another lockdep_init_map_*() variant, but forgot to update all the
existing u

locking/lockdep: Fix lockdep_init_map_*() confusion

Commit dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t") added yet
another lockdep_init_map_*() variant, but forgot to update all the
existing users of the most complicated version.

This could lead to a loss of lock_type and hence an incorrect report.
Given the relative rarity of both local_lock and these annotations,
this is unlikely to happen in practise, still, best fix things.

Fixes: dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YqyEDtoan20K0CVD@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net

show more ...

cxl/acpi: Add root device lockdep validation

The CXL "root" device, ACPI0017, is an attach point for coordinating
platform level CXL resources and is the parent device for a CXL port
topology tree.

cxl/acpi: Add root device lockdep validation

The CXL "root" device, ACPI0017, is an attach point for coordinating
platform level CXL resources and is the parent device for a CXL port
topology tree. As such it has distinct locking rules relative to other
CXL subsystem objects, but because it is an ACPI device the lock class
is established well before it is given to the cxl_acpi driver.

However, the lockdep API does support changing the lock class "live" for
situations like this. Add a device_lock_set_class() helper that a driver
can use in ->probe() to set a custom lock class, and
device_lock_reset_class() to return to the default "no validate" class
before the custom lock class key goes out of scope after ->remove().

Note the helpers are all macros to support dead code elimination in the
CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=n case, however device_set_lock_class() still needs
#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING since lockdep_match_class() explicitly does
not have a helper in the CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=n case (see comment in
lockdep.h). The lockdep API needs 2 small tweaks to prevent "unused"
warnings for the @key argument to lock_set_class(), and a new
lock_set_novalidate_class() is added to supplement
lockdep_set_novalidate_class() in the cases where the lock class is
converted while the lock is held.

Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
Cc: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>
Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/165100081305.1528964.11138612430659737238.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>

show more ...

kernel/lockdep: move lockdep sysctls to its own file

kernel/sysctl.c is a kitchen sink where everyone leaves their dirty
dishes, this makes it very difficult to maintain.

To help with this maintena

kernel/lockdep: move lockdep sysctls to its own file

kernel/sysctl.c is a kitchen sink where everyone leaves their dirty
dishes, this makes it very difficult to maintain.

To help with this maintenance let's start by moving sysctls to places
where they actually belong. The proc sysctl maintainers do not want to
know what sysctl knobs you wish to add for your own piece of code, we
just care about the core logic.

All filesystem syctls now get reviewed by fs folks. This commit
follows the commit of fs, move the prove_locking and lock_stat sysctls
to its own file, kernel/lockdep.c.

Signed-off-by: tangmeng <tangmeng@uniontech.com>
Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>

show more ...

net: Revert the softirq will run annotation in ____napi_schedule().

The lockdep annotation lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run() expects that
either hard or soft interrupts are disabled because both gua

net: Revert the softirq will run annotation in ____napi_schedule().

The lockdep annotation lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run() expects that
either hard or soft interrupts are disabled because both guaranty that
the "raised" soft-interrupts will be processed once the context is left.

This triggers in flush_smp_call_function_from_idle() but it this case it
explicitly calls do_softirq() in case of pending softirqs.

Revert the "softirq will run" annotation in ____napi_schedule() and move
the check back to __netif_rx() as it was. Keep the IRQ-off assert in
____napi_schedule() because this is always required.

Fixes: fbd9a2ceba5c7 ("net: Add lockdep asserts to ____napi_schedule().")
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/YjhD3ZKWysyw8rc6@linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>

show more ...

net: Add lockdep asserts to ____napi_schedule().

____napi_schedule() needs to be invoked with disabled interrupts due to
__raise_softirq_irqoff (in order not to corrupt the per-CPU list).
____napi_s

net: Add lockdep asserts to ____napi_schedule().

____napi_schedule() needs to be invoked with disabled interrupts due to
__raise_softirq_irqoff (in order not to corrupt the per-CPU list).
____napi_schedule() needs also to be invoked from an interrupt context
so that the raised-softirq is processed while the interrupt context is
left.

Add lockdep asserts for both conditions.
While this is the second time the irq/softirq check is needed, provide a
generic lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run() which is used by both caller.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

show more ...

locking: Remove spin_lock_flags() etc

parisc, ia64 and powerpc32 are the only remaining architectures that
provide custom arch_{spin,read,write}_lock_flags() functions, which are
meant to re-enable

locking: Remove spin_lock_flags() etc

parisc, ia64 and powerpc32 are the only remaining architectures that
provide custom arch_{spin,read,write}_lock_flags() functions, which are
meant to re-enable interrupts while waiting for a spinlock.

However, none of these can actually run into this codepath, because
it is only called on architectures without CONFIG_GENERIC_LOCKBREAK,
or when CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is set without CONFIG_LOCKDEP, and none
of those combinations are possible on the three architectures.

Going back in the git history, it appears that arch/mn10300 may have
been able to run into this code path, but there is a good chance that
it never worked. On the architectures that still exist, it was
already impossible to hit back in 2008 after the introduction of
CONFIG_GENERIC_LOCKBREAK, and possibly earlier.

As this is all dead code, just remove it and the helper functions built
around it. For arch/ia64, the inline asm could be cleaned up, but
it seems safer to leave it untouched.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> # parisc
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211022120058.1031690-1-arnd@kernel.org

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Fix lockdep_init_map_*() confusion

[ Upstream commit eae6d58d67d9739be5f7ae2dbead1d0ef6528243 ]

Commit dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t") added yet
another lockdep

locking/lockdep: Fix lockdep_init_map_*() confusion

[ Upstream commit eae6d58d67d9739be5f7ae2dbead1d0ef6528243 ]

Commit dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t") added yet
another lockdep_init_map_*() variant, but forgot to update all the
existing users of the most complicated version.

This could lead to a loss of lock_type and hence an incorrect report.
Given the relative rarity of both local_lock and these annotations,
this is unlikely to happen in practise, still, best fix things.

Fixes: dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YqyEDtoan20K0CVD@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Provide lockdep_assert{,_once}() helpers

Extract lockdep_assert{,_once}() helpers to more easily write composite
assertions like, for example:

lockdep_assert(lockdep_is_held(&drm_

locking/lockdep: Provide lockdep_assert{,_once}() helpers

Extract lockdep_assert{,_once}() helpers to more easily write composite
assertions like, for example:

lockdep_assert(lockdep_is_held(&drm_device.master_mutex) ||
lockdep_is_held(&drm_file.master_lookup_lock));

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Desmond Cheong Zhi Xi <desmondcheongzx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210802105957.77692-2-desmondcheongzx@gmail.com

show more ...

locking: Fix typos in comments

Fix ~16 single-word typos in locking code comments.

Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@k

locking: Fix typos in comments

Fix ~16 single-word typos in locking code comments.

Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

show more ...

lockdep: Add lockdep lock state defines

Adds defines for lock state returns from lock_is_held_type() based on
Johannes Berg's suggestions as it make it easier to read and maintain
the lock states. T

lockdep: Add lockdep lock state defines

Adds defines for lock state returns from lock_is_held_type() based on
Johannes Berg's suggestions as it make it easier to read and maintain
the lock states. These are defines and a enum to avoid changes to
lock_is_held_type() and lockdep_is_held() return types.

Updates to lock_is_held_type() and __lock_is_held() to use the new
defines.

Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/871rdmu9z9.fsf@codeaurora.org/

show more ...

lockdep: Add lockdep_assert_not_held()

Some kernel functions must be called without holding a specific lock.
Add lockdep_assert_not_held() to be used in these functions to detect
incorrect calls whi

lockdep: Add lockdep_assert_not_held()

Some kernel functions must be called without holding a specific lock.
Add lockdep_assert_not_held() to be used in these functions to detect
incorrect calls while holding a lock.

lockdep_assert_not_held() provides the opposite functionality of
lockdep_assert_held() which is used to assert calls that require
holding a specific lock.

Incorporates suggestions from Peter Zijlstra to avoid misfires when
lockdep_off() is employed.

The need for lockdep_assert_not_held() came up in a discussion on
ath10k patch. ath10k_drain_tx() and i915_vma_pin_ww() are examples
of functions that can use lockdep_assert_not_held().

Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/871rdmu9z9.fsf@codeaurora.org/

show more ...

drm/syncobj: make lockdep complain on WAIT_FOR_SUBMIT v3

DRM_SYNCOBJ_WAIT_FLAGS_WAIT_FOR_SUBMIT can't be used when we hold locks
since we are basically waiting for userspace to do something.

Holdin

drm/syncobj: make lockdep complain on WAIT_FOR_SUBMIT v3

DRM_SYNCOBJ_WAIT_FLAGS_WAIT_FOR_SUBMIT can't be used when we hold locks
since we are basically waiting for userspace to do something.

Holding a lock while doing so can trivial deadlock with page faults
etc...

So make lockdep complain when a driver tries to do this.

v2: Add lockdep_assert_none_held() macro.
v3: Add might_sleep() and also use lockdep_assert_none_held() in the
IOCTL path.

Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/414944/

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t

The local_lock_t's are special, because they cannot form IRQ
inversions, make sure we can tell them apart from the rest of the
locks.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstr

locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t

The local_lock_t's are special, because they cannot form IRQ
inversions, make sure we can tell them apart from the rest of the
locks.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>

show more ...

lockdep: Introduce in_softirq lockdep assert

The current semantic for napi_consume_skb() is that caller need
to provide non-zero budget when calling from NAPI context, and
breaking this semantic wil

lockdep: Introduce in_softirq lockdep assert

The current semantic for napi_consume_skb() is that caller need
to provide non-zero budget when calling from NAPI context, and
breaking this semantic will cause hard to debug problem, because
_kfree_skb_defer() need to run in atomic context in order to push
the skb to the particular cpu' napi_alloc_cache atomically.

So add the lockdep_assert_in_softirq() to assert when the running
context is not in_softirq, in_softirq means softirq is serving or
BH is disabled, which has a ambiguous semantics due to the BH
disabled confusion, so add a comment to emphasize that.

And the softirq context can be interrupted by hard IRQ or NMI
context, lockdep_assert_in_softirq() need to assert about hard
IRQ or NMI context too.

Suggested-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>

show more ...

lockdep: Provide dummy forward declaration of *_is_held() helpers

When CONFIG_LOCKDEP is not set, lock_is_held() and lockdep_is_held()
are not declared or defined. This forces all callers to use #i

lockdep: Provide dummy forward declaration of *_is_held() helpers

When CONFIG_LOCKDEP is not set, lock_is_held() and lockdep_is_held()
are not declared or defined. This forces all callers to use #ifdefs
around these checks.

Recent RCU changes added a lot of lockdep_is_held() calls inside
rcu_dereference_protected(). This macro hides its argument on !LOCKDEP
builds, which can lead to false-positive unused-variable warnings.

This commit therefore provides forward declarations of lock_is_held()
and lockdep_is_held() but without defining them. This way callers
(including those internal to RCU) can keep them visible to the compiler
on !LOCKDEP builds and instead depend on dead code elimination to remove
the references, which in turn prevents the linker from complaining about
the lack of the corresponding function definitions.

[ paulmck: Apply Peter Zijlstra feedback on "extern". ]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
--
CC: peterz@infradead.org
CC: mingo@redhat.com
CC: will@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>

show more ...

locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t

[ Upstream commit dfd5e3f5fe27bda91d5cc028c86ffbb7a0614489 ]

The local_lock_t's are special, because they cannot form IRQ
inversions, make sure we can tell them a

locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t

[ Upstream commit dfd5e3f5fe27bda91d5cc028c86ffbb7a0614489 ]

The local_lock_t's are special, because they cannot form IRQ
inversions, make sure we can tell them apart from the rest of the
locks.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

lockdep: Revert "lockdep: Use raw_cpu_*() for per-cpu variables"

The thinking in commit:

fddf9055a60d ("lockdep: Use raw_cpu_*() for per-cpu variables")

is flawed. While it is true that when we'

lockdep: Revert "lockdep: Use raw_cpu_*() for per-cpu variables"

The thinking in commit:

fddf9055a60d ("lockdep: Use raw_cpu_*() for per-cpu variables")

is flawed. While it is true that when we're migratable both CPUs will
have a 0 value, it doesn't hold that when we do get migrated in the
middle of a raw_cpu_op(), the old CPU will still have 0 by the time we
get around to reading it on the new CPU.

Luckily, the reason for that commit (s390 using preempt_disable()
instead of preempt_disable_notrace() in their percpu code), has since
been fixed by commit:

1196f12a2c96 ("s390: don't trace preemption in percpu macros")

An audit of arch/*/include/asm/percpu*.h shows there are no other
architectures affected by this particular issue.

Fixes: fddf9055a60d ("lockdep: Use raw_cpu_*() for per-cpu variables")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201005095958.GJ2651@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net

show more ...

lockdep: Fix lockdep recursion

Steve reported that lockdep_assert*irq*(), when nested inside lockdep
itself, will trigger a false-positive.

One example is the stack-trace code, as called from insid

lockdep: Fix lockdep recursion

Steve reported that lockdep_assert*irq*(), when nested inside lockdep
itself, will trigger a false-positive.

One example is the stack-trace code, as called from inside lockdep,
triggering tracing, which in turn calls RCU, which then uses
lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled().

Fixes: a21ee6055c30 ("lockdep: Change hardirq{s_enabled,_context} to per-cpu variables")
Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

show more ...

lockdep: Extend __bfs() to work with multiple types of dependencies

Now we have four types of dependencies in the dependency graph, and not
all the pathes carry real dependencies (the dependencies t

lockdep: Extend __bfs() to work with multiple types of dependencies

Now we have four types of dependencies in the dependency graph, and not
all the pathes carry real dependencies (the dependencies that may cause
a deadlock), for example:

Given lock A and B, if we have:

CPU1 CPU2
============= ==============
write_lock(A); read_lock(B);
read_lock(B); write_lock(A);

(assuming read_lock(B) is a recursive reader)

then we have dependencies A -(ER)-> B, and B -(SN)-> A, and a
dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A.

In lockdep w/o recursive locks, a dependency path from A to A
means a deadlock. However, the above case is obviously not a
deadlock, because no one holds B exclusively, therefore no one
waits for the other to release B, so who get A first in CPU1 and
CPU2 will run non-blockingly.

As a result, dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A is not a
real/strong dependency that could cause a deadlock.

From the observation above, we know that for a dependency path to be
real/strong, no two adjacent dependencies can be as -(*R)-> -(S*)->.

Now our mission is to make __bfs() traverse only the strong dependency
paths, which is simple: we record whether we only have -(*R)-> for the
previous lock_list of the path in lock_list::only_xr, and when we pick a
dependency in the traverse, we 1) filter out -(S*)-> dependency if the
previous lock_list only has -(*R)-> dependency (i.e. ->only_xr is true)
and 2) set the next lock_list::only_xr to true if we only have -(*R)->
left after we filter out dependencies based on 1), otherwise, set it to
false.

With this extension for __bfs(), we now need to initialize the root of
__bfs() properly (with a correct ->only_xr), to do so, we introduce some
helper functions, which also cleans up a little bit for the __bfs() root
initialization code.

Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-8-boqun.feng@gmail.com

show more ...