Re: [PATCH] rcu-tasks: Avoid pr_info() with spin lock in cblist_init_generic()
From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Wed Mar 22 2023 - 17:24:14 EST
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 06:52:45AM +0000, Zhang, Qiang1 wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 01:22:05AM +0900, Shigeru Yoshida wrote:
> > > pr_info() is called with rtp->cbs_gbl_lock spin lock locked. Because
> > > pr_info() calls printk() that might sleep, this will result in BUG
> > > like below:
> > >
> > > [ 0.206455] cblist_init_generic: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.
> > > [ 0.206463]
> > > [ 0.206464] =============================
> > > [ 0.206464] [ BUG: Invalid wait context ]
> > > [ 0.206465] 5.19.0-00428-g9de1f9c8ca51 #5 Not tainted
> > > [ 0.206466] -----------------------------
> > > [ 0.206466] swapper/0/1 is trying to lock:
> > > [ 0.206467] ffffffffa0167a58 (&port_lock_key){....}-{3:3}, at: serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > > [ 0.206473] other info that might help us debug this:
> > > [ 0.206473] context-{5:5}
> > > [ 0.206474] 3 locks held by swapper/0/1:
> > > [ 0.206474] #0: ffffffff9eb597e0 (rcu_tasks.cbs_gbl_lock){....}-{2:2}, at: cblist_init_generic.constprop.0+0x14/0x1f0
> > > [ 0.206478] #1: ffffffff9eb579c0 (console_lock){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: _printk+0x63/0x7e
> > > [ 0.206482] #2: ffffffff9ea77780 (console_owner){....}-{0:0}, at: console_emit_next_record.constprop.0+0x111/0x330
> > > [ 0.206485] stack backtrace:
> > > [ 0.206486] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.19.0-00428-g9de1f9c8ca51 #5
> > > [ 0.206488] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.0-1.fc36 04/01/2014
> > > [ 0.206489] Call Trace:
> > > [ 0.206490] <TASK>
> > > [ 0.206491] dump_stack_lvl+0x6a/0x9f
> > > [ 0.206493] __lock_acquire.cold+0x2d7/0x2fe
> > > [ 0.206496] ? stack_trace_save+0x46/0x70
> > > [ 0.206497] lock_acquire+0xd1/0x2f0
> > > [ 0.206499] ? serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > > [ 0.206500] ? __lock_acquire+0x5c7/0x2720
> > > [ 0.206502] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x90
> > > [ 0.206504] ? serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > > [ 0.206506] serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > > [ 0.206508] console_emit_next_record.constprop.0+0x180/0x330
> > > [ 0.206511] console_unlock+0xf7/0x1f0
> > > [ 0.206512] vprintk_emit+0xf7/0x330
> > > [ 0.206514] _printk+0x63/0x7e
> > > [ 0.206516] cblist_init_generic.constprop.0.cold+0x24/0x32
> > > [ 0.206518] rcu_init_tasks_generic+0x5/0xd9
> > > [ 0.206522] kernel_init_freeable+0x15b/0x2a2
> > > [ 0.206523] ? rest_init+0x160/0x160
> > > [ 0.206526] kernel_init+0x11/0x120
> > > [ 0.206527] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> > > [ 0.206530] </TASK>
> > > [ 0.207018] cblist_init_generic: Setting shift to 1 and lim to 1.
> > >
> > > This patch moves pr_info() so that it is called without
> > > rtp->cbs_gbl_lock locked.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Shigeru Yoshida <syoshida@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This patch looks good, except that wasn't this supposed to be fixed
> > in printk()? Or am I suffering from wishful thinking?
> >
> >And I was indeed suffering from wishful thinking, so I have queued this
> >patch. A big "thank you!" to all for your patience, and to Shigeru for
> >this fix!
> >
>
> Test the patch
>
> [ 0.178892] cblist_init_generic: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.
> [ 0.179366] cblist_init_generic: Setting shift to 2 and lim to 1.
> [ 0.179488] cblist_init_generic: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.
> [ 0.179961] cblist_init_generic: Setting shift to 2 and lim to 1.
> [ 0.180470] cblist_init_generic: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.
> [ 0.180949] cblist_init_generic: Setting shift to 2 and lim to 1.
Nice! Can you see the problem without that patch? If so, may I apply
your Tested-by?
> It looks more clearly
>
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> @@ -270,10 +270,9 @@ static void cblist_init_generic(struct rcu_tasks *rtp)
> }
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtp->cbs_gbl_lock, flags);
>
> - if (rcu_task_cb_adjust)
> - pr_info("%s: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.\n", __func__);
> -
> - pr_info("%s: Setting shift to %d and lim to %d.\n", __func__, data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_shift), data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_lim));
> + pr_info("%s: Setting shift to %d and lim to %d rcu_task_cb_adjust=%d.\n",
> + rtp->name, data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_shift),
> + data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_lim), rcu_task_cb_adjust);
> }
>
>
> [ 0.178746] RCU Tasks: Setting shift to 2 and lim to 1 rcu_task_cb_adjust=1.
> [ 0.179322] RCU Tasks Rude: Setting shift to 2 and lim to 1 rcu_task_cb_adjust=1.
> [ 0.180076] RCU Tasks Trace: Setting shift to 2 and lim to 1 rcu_task_cb_adjust=1.
If you make that "Setting shift to 2, lim to 1, and rcu_task_cb_adjust=1."
looks like an improvement to me!
Please send a proper patch for it. There might be objections if someone
has scripting depending on the old message format, but that is after
all one of the reasons for putting patches out for review.
Thanx, Paul
> Thanks
> Zqiang
>
> > Thanx, Paul
> >
> > > ---
> > > kernel/rcu/tasks.h | 5 ++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > > index 3925e32159b5..d46dd970bf22 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > > @@ -227,7 +227,6 @@ static void cblist_init_generic(struct rcu_tasks *rtp)
> > > if (rcu_task_enqueue_lim < 0) {
> > > rcu_task_enqueue_lim = 1;
> > > rcu_task_cb_adjust = true;
> > > - pr_info("%s: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.\n", __func__);
> > > } else if (rcu_task_enqueue_lim == 0) {
> > > rcu_task_enqueue_lim = 1;
> > > }
> > > @@ -256,6 +255,10 @@ static void cblist_init_generic(struct rcu_tasks *rtp)
> > > raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(rtpcp); // irqs remain disabled.
> > > }
> > > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtp->cbs_gbl_lock, flags);
> > > +
> > > + if (rcu_task_cb_adjust)
> > > + pr_info("%s: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.\n", __func__);
> > > +
> > > pr_info("%s: Setting shift to %d and lim to %d.\n", __func__, data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_shift), data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_lim));
> > > }
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.37.1
> > >