[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] kernel/locking: Add context to ww_mutex_trylock.
Maarten Lankhorst
maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com
Tue Sep 14 12:43:02 UTC 2021
Op 14-09-2021 om 08:50 schreef Peter Zijlstra:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 10:42:36AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>
>>> +/**
>>> + * ww_mutex_trylock - tries to acquire the w/w mutex with optional acquire context
>>> + * @ww: mutex to lock
>>> + * @ww_ctx: optional w/w acquire context
>>> + *
>>> + * Trylocks a mutex with the optional acquire context; no deadlock detection is
>>> + * possible. Returns 1 if the mutex has been acquired successfully, 0 otherwise.
>>> + *
>>> + * Unlike ww_mutex_lock, no deadlock handling is performed. However, if a @ctx is
>>> + * specified, -EALREADY handling may happen in calls to ww_mutex_trylock.
>>> + *
>>> + * A mutex acquired with this function must be released with ww_mutex_unlock.
>>> + */
>>> +int ww_mutex_trylock(struct ww_mutex *ww, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx)
>>> +{
>>> + if (!ww_ctx)
>>> + return mutex_trylock(&ww->base);
>>> +
>>> + MUTEX_WARN_ON(ww->base.magic != &ww->base);
>>> +
>>> + if (unlikely(ww_ctx == READ_ONCE(ww->ctx)))
>>> + return -EALREADY;
>> I'm not 100% sure this is a good idea, because it would make the
>> trylock weird. For i915 I checked manually, because I didn't want to
>> change the function signature. This is probably the other extreme.
>>
>> "if (ww_mutex_trylock())" would look correct, but actually be wrong
>> and lead to double unlock without adjustments. Maybe we could make a
>> ww_mutex_trylock_ctx_err, which would return -EALREADY or -EBUSY on
>> failure, and 0 on success? We could keep ww_mutex_trylock without
>> ctx, probably just #define as (!ww_mutex_trylock_ctx_err(lock, NULL))
> Urgh, yeah. Also, I suppose that if we already own it, we'll just fail
> the trylock anyway. Let me take this out.
>
>>> + /*
>>> + * Reset the wounded flag after a kill. No other process can
>>> + * race and wound us here, since they can't have a valid owner
>>> + * pointer if we don't have any locks held.
>>> + */
>>> + if (ww_ctx->acquired == 0)
>>> + ww_ctx->wounded = 0;
>> Yeah I guess this needs fixing too. Not completely sure since trylock
>> wouldn't do the whole ww dance, but since it's our first lock,
>> probably best to do so regardless so other users don't trip over it.
> This is actually critical, because if this trylock is the first lock
> acquisition for the context, there won't be any other opportunity to
> reset this value.
>
>>> +
>>> + if (__mutex_trylock(&ww->base)) {
>>> + ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(ww, ww_ctx);
>>> + mutex_acquire_nest(&ww->base.dep_map, 0, 1, &ww_ctx->dep_map, _RET_IP_);
>>> + return 1;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ww_mutex_trylock);
> Updated version below...
>
> ---
> Subject: kernel/locking: Add context to ww_mutex_trylock()
> From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 11:32:18 +0200
>
> From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
>
> i915 will soon gain an eviction path that trylock a whole lot of locks
> for eviction, getting dmesg failures like below:
>
> BUG: MAX_LOCK_DEPTH too low!
> turning off the locking correctness validator.
> depth: 48 max: 48!
> 48 locks held by i915_selftest/5776:
> #0: ffff888101a79240 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: __driver_attach+0x88/0x160
> #1: ffffc900009778c0 (reservation_ww_class_acquire){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: i915_vma_pin.constprop.63+0x39/0x1b0 [i915]
> #2: ffff88800cf74de8 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_vma_pin.constprop.63+0x5f/0x1b0 [i915]
> #3: ffff88810c7f9e38 (&vm->mutex/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_vma_pin_ww+0x1c4/0x9d0 [i915]
> #4: ffff88810bad5768 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915]
> #5: ffff88810bad60e8 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915]
> ...
> #46: ffff88811964d768 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915]
> #47: ffff88811964e0e8 (reservation_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: i915_gem_evict_something+0x110/0x860 [i915]
> INFO: lockdep is turned off.
>
> Fixing eviction to nest into ww_class_acquire is a high priority, but
> it requires a rework of the entire driver, which can only be done one
> step at a time.
>
> As an intermediate solution, add an acquire context to
> ww_mutex_trylock, which allows us to do proper nesting annotations on
> the trylocks, making the above lockdep splat disappear.
>
> This is also useful in regulator_lock_nested, which may avoid dropping
> regulator_nesting_mutex in the uncontended path, so use it there.
>
> TTM may be another user for this, where we could lock a buffer in a
> fastpath with list locks held, without dropping all locks we hold.
>
> [peterz: rework actual ww_mutex_trylock() implementations]
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz at infradead.org>
> ---
My original patch series with this patch in place still passes i915 selftests, looks good to me. :)
Feel free to apply.
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c | 2
> drivers/regulator/core.c | 2
> include/linux/dma-resv.h | 2
> include/linux/ww_mutex.h | 15 ------
> kernel/locking/mutex.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++
> kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> kernel/locking/ww_rt_mutex.c | 25 ++++++++++
> lib/locking-selftest.c | 2
> 8 files changed, 137 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c
> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ static inline int modeset_lock(struct dr
> if (ctx->trylock_only) {
> lockdep_assert_held(&ctx->ww_ctx);
>
> - if (!ww_mutex_trylock(&lock->mutex))
> + if (!ww_mutex_trylock(&lock->mutex, NULL))
> return -EBUSY;
> else
> return 0;
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ static inline int regulator_lock_nested(
>
> mutex_lock(®ulator_nesting_mutex);
>
> - if (ww_ctx || !ww_mutex_trylock(&rdev->mutex)) {
> + if (!ww_mutex_trylock(&rdev->mutex, ww_ctx)) {
> if (rdev->mutex_owner == current)
> rdev->ref_cnt++;
> else
> --- a/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> @@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ static inline int dma_resv_lock_slow_int
> */
> static inline bool __must_check dma_resv_trylock(struct dma_resv *obj)
> {
> - return ww_mutex_trylock(&obj->lock);
> + return ww_mutex_trylock(&obj->lock, NULL);
> }
>
> /**
> --- a/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
> @@ -28,12 +28,10 @@
> #ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> #define WW_MUTEX_BASE mutex
> #define ww_mutex_base_init(l,n,k) __mutex_init(l,n,k)
> -#define ww_mutex_base_trylock(l) mutex_trylock(l)
> #define ww_mutex_base_is_locked(b) mutex_is_locked((b))
> #else
> #define WW_MUTEX_BASE rt_mutex
> #define ww_mutex_base_init(l,n,k) __rt_mutex_init(l,n,k)
> -#define ww_mutex_base_trylock(l) rt_mutex_trylock(l)
> #define ww_mutex_base_is_locked(b) rt_mutex_base_is_locked(&(b)->rtmutex)
> #endif
>
> @@ -339,17 +337,8 @@ ww_mutex_lock_slow_interruptible(struct
>
> extern void ww_mutex_unlock(struct ww_mutex *lock);
>
> -/**
> - * ww_mutex_trylock - tries to acquire the w/w mutex without acquire context
> - * @lock: mutex to lock
> - *
> - * Trylocks a mutex without acquire context, so no deadlock detection is
> - * possible. Returns 1 if the mutex has been acquired successfully, 0 otherwise.
> - */
> -static inline int __must_check ww_mutex_trylock(struct ww_mutex *lock)
> -{
> - return ww_mutex_base_trylock(&lock->base);
> -}
> +extern int __must_check ww_mutex_trylock(struct ww_mutex *lock,
> + struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx);
>
> /***
> * ww_mutex_destroy - mark a w/w mutex unusable
> --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> @@ -94,6 +94,9 @@ static inline unsigned long __owner_flag
> return owner & MUTEX_FLAGS;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Returns: __mutex_owner(lock) on failure or NULL on success.
> + */
> static inline struct task_struct *__mutex_trylock_common(struct mutex *lock, bool handoff)
> {
> unsigned long owner, curr = (unsigned long)current;
> @@ -736,6 +739,44 @@ __ww_mutex_lock(struct mutex *lock, unsi
> return __mutex_lock_common(lock, state, subclass, NULL, ip, ww_ctx, true);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * ww_mutex_trylock - tries to acquire the w/w mutex with optional acquire context
> + * @ww: mutex to lock
> + * @ww_ctx: optional w/w acquire context
> + *
> + * Trylocks a mutex with the optional acquire context; no deadlock detection is
> + * possible. Returns 1 if the mutex has been acquired successfully, 0 otherwise.
> + *
> + * Unlike ww_mutex_lock, no deadlock handling is performed. However, if a @ctx is
> + * specified, -EALREADY handling may happen in calls to ww_mutex_trylock.
> + *
> + * A mutex acquired with this function must be released with ww_mutex_unlock.
> + */
> +int ww_mutex_trylock(struct ww_mutex *ww, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx)
> +{
> + if (!ww_ctx)
> + return mutex_trylock(&ww->base);
> +
> + MUTEX_WARN_ON(ww->base.magic != &ww->base);
> +
> + /*
> + * Reset the wounded flag after a kill. No other process can
> + * race and wound us here, since they can't have a valid owner
> + * pointer if we don't have any locks held.
> + */
> + if (ww_ctx->acquired == 0)
> + ww_ctx->wounded = 0;
> +
> + if (__mutex_trylock(&ww->base)) {
> + ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(ww, ww_ctx);
> + mutex_acquire_nest(&ww->base.dep_map, 0, 1, &ww_ctx->dep_map, _RET_IP_);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ww_mutex_trylock);
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> void __sched
> mutex_lock_nested(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int subclass)
> --- a/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c
> @@ -16,6 +16,15 @@
> static DEFINE_WD_CLASS(ww_class);
> struct workqueue_struct *wq;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_WW_MUTEX_SLOWPATH
> +#define ww_acquire_init_noinject(a, b) do { \
> + ww_acquire_init((a), (b)); \
> + (a)->deadlock_inject_countdown = ~0U; \
> + } while (0)
> +#else
> +#define ww_acquire_init_noinject(a, b) ww_acquire_init((a), (b))
> +#endif
> +
> struct test_mutex {
> struct work_struct work;
> struct ww_mutex mutex;
> @@ -36,7 +45,7 @@ static void test_mutex_work(struct work_
> wait_for_completion(&mtx->go);
>
> if (mtx->flags & TEST_MTX_TRY) {
> - while (!ww_mutex_trylock(&mtx->mutex))
> + while (!ww_mutex_trylock(&mtx->mutex, NULL))
> cond_resched();
> } else {
> ww_mutex_lock(&mtx->mutex, NULL);
> @@ -109,19 +118,38 @@ static int test_mutex(void)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int test_aa(void)
> +static int test_aa(bool trylock)
> {
> struct ww_mutex mutex;
> struct ww_acquire_ctx ctx;
> int ret;
> + const char *from = trylock ? "trylock" : "lock";
>
> ww_mutex_init(&mutex, &ww_class);
> ww_acquire_init(&ctx, &ww_class);
>
> - ww_mutex_lock(&mutex, &ctx);
> + if (!trylock) {
> + ret = ww_mutex_lock(&mutex, &ctx);
> + if (ret) {
> + pr_err("%s: initial lock failed!\n", __func__);
> + goto out;
> + }
> + } else {
> + if (!ww_mutex_trylock(&mutex, &ctx)) {
> + pr_err("%s: initial trylock failed!\n", __func__);
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
>
> - if (ww_mutex_trylock(&mutex)) {
> - pr_err("%s: trylocked itself!\n", __func__);
> + if (ww_mutex_trylock(&mutex, NULL)) {
> + pr_err("%s: trylocked itself without context from %s!\n", __func__, from);
> + ww_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + if (ww_mutex_trylock(&mutex, &ctx)) {
> + pr_err("%s: trylocked itself with context from %s!\n", __func__, from);
> ww_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto out;
> @@ -129,17 +157,17 @@ static int test_aa(void)
>
> ret = ww_mutex_lock(&mutex, &ctx);
> if (ret != -EALREADY) {
> - pr_err("%s: missed deadlock for recursing, ret=%d\n",
> - __func__, ret);
> + pr_err("%s: missed deadlock for recursing, ret=%d from %s\n",
> + __func__, ret, from);
> if (!ret)
> ww_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto out;
> }
>
> + ww_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
> ret = 0;
> out:
> - ww_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
> ww_acquire_fini(&ctx);
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -150,7 +178,7 @@ struct test_abba {
> struct ww_mutex b_mutex;
> struct completion a_ready;
> struct completion b_ready;
> - bool resolve;
> + bool resolve, trylock;
> int result;
> };
>
> @@ -160,8 +188,13 @@ static void test_abba_work(struct work_s
> struct ww_acquire_ctx ctx;
> int err;
>
> - ww_acquire_init(&ctx, &ww_class);
> - ww_mutex_lock(&abba->b_mutex, &ctx);
> + ww_acquire_init_noinject(&ctx, &ww_class);
> + if (!abba->trylock)
> + ww_mutex_lock(&abba->b_mutex, &ctx);
> + else
> + WARN_ON(!ww_mutex_trylock(&abba->b_mutex, &ctx));
> +
> + WARN_ON(READ_ONCE(abba->b_mutex.ctx) != &ctx);
>
> complete(&abba->b_ready);
> wait_for_completion(&abba->a_ready);
> @@ -181,7 +214,7 @@ static void test_abba_work(struct work_s
> abba->result = err;
> }
>
> -static int test_abba(bool resolve)
> +static int test_abba(bool trylock, bool resolve)
> {
> struct test_abba abba;
> struct ww_acquire_ctx ctx;
> @@ -192,12 +225,18 @@ static int test_abba(bool resolve)
> INIT_WORK_ONSTACK(&abba.work, test_abba_work);
> init_completion(&abba.a_ready);
> init_completion(&abba.b_ready);
> + abba.trylock = trylock;
> abba.resolve = resolve;
>
> schedule_work(&abba.work);
>
> - ww_acquire_init(&ctx, &ww_class);
> - ww_mutex_lock(&abba.a_mutex, &ctx);
> + ww_acquire_init_noinject(&ctx, &ww_class);
> + if (!trylock)
> + ww_mutex_lock(&abba.a_mutex, &ctx);
> + else
> + WARN_ON(!ww_mutex_trylock(&abba.a_mutex, &ctx));
> +
> + WARN_ON(READ_ONCE(abba.a_mutex.ctx) != &ctx);
>
> complete(&abba.a_ready);
> wait_for_completion(&abba.b_ready);
> @@ -249,7 +288,7 @@ static void test_cycle_work(struct work_
> struct ww_acquire_ctx ctx;
> int err, erra = 0;
>
> - ww_acquire_init(&ctx, &ww_class);
> + ww_acquire_init_noinject(&ctx, &ww_class);
> ww_mutex_lock(&cycle->a_mutex, &ctx);
>
> complete(cycle->a_signal);
> @@ -581,7 +620,9 @@ static int stress(int nlocks, int nthrea
> static int __init test_ww_mutex_init(void)
> {
> int ncpus = num_online_cpus();
> - int ret;
> + int ret, i;
> +
> + printk(KERN_INFO "Beginning ww mutex selftests\n");
>
> wq = alloc_workqueue("test-ww_mutex", WQ_UNBOUND, 0);
> if (!wq)
> @@ -591,17 +632,19 @@ static int __init test_ww_mutex_init(voi
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - ret = test_aa();
> + ret = test_aa(false);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - ret = test_abba(false);
> + ret = test_aa(true);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - ret = test_abba(true);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
> + ret = test_abba(i & 1, i & 2);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> ret = test_cycle(ncpus);
> if (ret)
> @@ -619,6 +662,7 @@ static int __init test_ww_mutex_init(voi
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + printk(KERN_INFO "All ww mutex selftests passed\n");
> return 0;
> }
>
> --- a/kernel/locking/ww_rt_mutex.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/ww_rt_mutex.c
> @@ -9,6 +9,31 @@
> #define WW_RT
> #include "rtmutex.c"
>
> +int ww_mutex_trylock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx)
> +{
> + struct rt_mutex *rtm = &lock->base;
> +
> + if (!ww_ctx)
> + return rt_mutex_trylock(rtm);
> +
> + /*
> + * Reset the wounded flag after a kill. No other process can
> + * race and wound us here, since they can't have a valid owner
> + * pointer if we don't have any locks held.
> + */
> + if (ww_ctx->acquired == 0)
> + ww_ctx->wounded = 0;
> +
> + if (__rt_mutex_trylock(&rtm->rtmutex)) {
> + ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(lock, ww_ctx);
> + mutex_acquire_nest(&rtm->dep_map, 0, 1, ww_ctx->dep_map, _RET_IP_);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ww_mutex_trylock);
> +
> static int __sched
> __ww_rt_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx,
> unsigned int state, unsigned long ip)
> --- a/lib/locking-selftest.c
> +++ b/lib/locking-selftest.c
> @@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ static void init_shared_classes(void)
> #define WWAF(x) ww_acquire_fini(x)
>
> #define WWL(x, c) ww_mutex_lock(x, c)
> -#define WWT(x) ww_mutex_trylock(x)
> +#define WWT(x) ww_mutex_trylock(x, NULL)
> #define WWL1(x) ww_mutex_lock(x, NULL)
> #define WWU(x) ww_mutex_unlock(x)
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list