Commit 23870f12 authored by peterz@infradead.org's avatar peterz@infradead.org Committed by Ingo Molnar
Browse files

locking/lockdep: Fix "USED" <- "IN-NMI" inversions



During the LPC RCU BoF Paul asked how come the "USED" <- "IN-NMI"
detector doesn't trip over rcu_read_lock()'s lockdep annotation.

Looking into this I found a very embarrasing typo in
verify_lock_unused():

	-	if (!(class->usage_mask & LOCK_USED))
	+	if (!(class->usage_mask & LOCKF_USED))

fixing that will indeed cause rcu_read_lock() to insta-splat :/

The above typo means that instead of testing for: 0x100 (1 <<
LOCK_USED), we test for 8 (LOCK_USED), which corresponds to (1 <<
LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ).

So instead of testing for _any_ used lock, it will only match any lock
used with interrupts enabled.

The rcu_read_lock() annotation uses .check=0, which means it will not
set any of the interrupt bits and will thus never match.

In order to properly fix the situation and allow rcu_read_lock() to
correctly work, split LOCK_USED into LOCK_USED and LOCK_USED_READ and by
having .read users set USED_READ and test USED, pure read-recursive
locks are permitted.

Fixes: f6f48e18 ("lockdep: Teach lockdep about "USED" <- "IN-NMI" inversions")
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Tested-by: default avatarMasami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Acked-by: default avatarPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200902160323.GK1362448@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
parent fc3abb53
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
+29 −6
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -3969,13 +3969,18 @@ static int separate_irq_context(struct task_struct *curr,
static int mark_lock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
			     enum lock_usage_bit new_bit)
{
	unsigned int new_mask = 1 << new_bit, ret = 1;
	unsigned int old_mask, new_mask, ret = 1;

	if (new_bit >= LOCK_USAGE_STATES) {
		DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(1);
		return 0;
	}

	if (new_bit == LOCK_USED && this->read)
		new_bit = LOCK_USED_READ;

	new_mask = 1 << new_bit;

	/*
	 * If already set then do not dirty the cacheline,
	 * nor do any checks:
@@ -3988,13 +3993,22 @@ static int mark_lock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
	/*
	 * Make sure we didn't race:
	 */
	if (unlikely(hlock_class(this)->usage_mask & new_mask)) {
		graph_unlock();
		return 1;
	}
	if (unlikely(hlock_class(this)->usage_mask & new_mask))
		goto unlock;

	old_mask = hlock_class(this)->usage_mask;
	hlock_class(this)->usage_mask |= new_mask;

	/*
	 * Save one usage_traces[] entry and map both LOCK_USED and
	 * LOCK_USED_READ onto the same entry.
	 */
	if (new_bit == LOCK_USED || new_bit == LOCK_USED_READ) {
		if (old_mask & (LOCKF_USED | LOCKF_USED_READ))
			goto unlock;
		new_bit = LOCK_USED;
	}

	if (!(hlock_class(this)->usage_traces[new_bit] = save_trace()))
		return 0;

@@ -4008,6 +4022,7 @@ static int mark_lock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
			return 0;
	}

unlock:
	graph_unlock();

	/*
@@ -4942,12 +4957,20 @@ static void verify_lock_unused(struct lockdep_map *lock, struct held_lock *hlock
{
#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
	struct lock_class *class = look_up_lock_class(lock, subclass);
	unsigned long mask = LOCKF_USED;

	/* if it doesn't have a class (yet), it certainly hasn't been used yet */
	if (!class)
		return;

	if (!(class->usage_mask & LOCK_USED))
	/*
	 * READ locks only conflict with USED, such that if we only ever use
	 * READ locks, there is no deadlock possible -- RCU.
	 */
	if (!hlock->read)
		mask |= LOCKF_USED_READ;

	if (!(class->usage_mask & mask))
		return;

	hlock->class_idx = class - lock_classes;
+2 −0
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ enum lock_usage_bit {
#include "lockdep_states.h"
#undef LOCKDEP_STATE
	LOCK_USED,
	LOCK_USED_READ,
	LOCK_USAGE_STATES
};

@@ -40,6 +41,7 @@ enum {
#include "lockdep_states.h"
#undef LOCKDEP_STATE
	__LOCKF(USED)
	__LOCKF(USED_READ)
};

#define LOCKDEP_STATE(__STATE)	LOCKF_ENABLED_##__STATE |