diff options
authorThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>2014-05-22 03:25:39 +0000
committerThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>2014-05-28 17:28:13 +0200
commit397335f004f41e5fcf7a795e94eb3ab83411a17c (patch)
parentf0d71b3dcb8332f7971b5f2363632573e6d9486a (diff)
rtmutex: Fix deadlock detector for real
The current deadlock detection logic does not work reliably due to the following early exit path: /* * Drop out, when the task has no waiters. Note, * top_waiter can be NULL, when we are in the deboosting * mode! */ if (top_waiter && (!task_has_pi_waiters(task) || top_waiter != task_top_pi_waiter(task))) goto out_unlock_pi; So this not only exits when the task has no waiters, it also exits unconditionally when the current waiter is not the top priority waiter of the task. So in a nested locking scenario, it might abort the lock chain walk and therefor miss a potential deadlock. Simple fix: Continue the chain walk, when deadlock detection is enabled. We also avoid the whole enqueue, if we detect the deadlock right away (A-A). It's an optimization, but also prevents that another waiter who comes in after the detection and before the task has undone the damage observes the situation and detects the deadlock and returns -EDEADLOCK, which is wrong as the other task is not in a deadlock situation. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140522031949.725272460@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
1 files changed, 28 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index aa4dff04b59..a620d4d08ca 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -343,9 +343,16 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(struct task_struct *task,
* top_waiter can be NULL, when we are in the deboosting
* mode!
- if (top_waiter && (!task_has_pi_waiters(task) ||
- top_waiter != task_top_pi_waiter(task)))
- goto out_unlock_pi;
+ if (top_waiter) {
+ if (!task_has_pi_waiters(task))
+ goto out_unlock_pi;
+ /*
+ * If deadlock detection is off, we stop here if we
+ * are not the top pi waiter of the task.
+ */
+ if (!detect_deadlock && top_waiter != task_top_pi_waiter(task))
+ goto out_unlock_pi;
+ }
* When deadlock detection is off then we check, if further
@@ -361,7 +368,12 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(struct task_struct *task,
goto retry;
- /* Deadlock detection */
+ /*
+ * Deadlock detection. If the lock is the same as the original
+ * lock which caused us to walk the lock chain or if the
+ * current lock is owned by the task which initiated the chain
+ * walk, we detected a deadlock.
+ */
if (lock == orig_lock || rt_mutex_owner(lock) == top_task) {
debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(deadlock_detect, orig_waiter, lock);
@@ -527,6 +539,18 @@ static int task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex *lock,
unsigned long flags;
int chain_walk = 0, res;
+ /*
+ * Early deadlock detection. We really don't want the task to
+ * enqueue on itself just to untangle the mess later. It's not
+ * only an optimization. We drop the locks, so another waiter
+ * can come in before the chain walk detects the deadlock. So
+ * the other will detect the deadlock and return -EDEADLOCK,
+ * which is wrong, as the other waiter is not in a deadlock
+ * situation.
+ */
+ if (detect_deadlock && owner == task)
+ return -EDEADLK;
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&task->pi_lock, flags);
waiter->task = task;