linux-toradex.git/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c, branch v6.13-rc3

Merge tag 'sched-core-2024-11-18' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip

2024-11-19T22:16:06+00:00

Pull scheduler updates from Ingo Molnar:
 "Core facilities:

   - Add the "Lazy preemption" model (CONFIG_PREEMPT_LAZY=y), which
     optimizes fair-class preemption by delaying preemption requests to
     the tick boundary, while working as full preemption for
     RR/FIFO/DEADLINE classes. (Peter Zijlstra)
        - x86: Enable Lazy preemption (Peter Zijlstra)
        - riscv: Enable Lazy preemption (Jisheng Zhang)

   - Initialize idle tasks only once (Thomas Gleixner)

   - sched/ext: Remove sched_fork() hack (Thomas Gleixner)

  Fair scheduler:

   - Optimize the PLACE_LAG when se->vlag is zero (Huang Shijie)

  Idle loop:

   - Optimize the generic idle loop by removing unnecessary memory
     barrier (Zhongqiu Han)

  RSEQ:

   - Improve cache locality of RSEQ concurrency IDs for intermittent
     workloads (Mathieu Desnoyers)

  Waitqueues:

   - Make wake_up_{bit,var} less fragile (Neil Brown)

  PSI:

   - Pass enqueue/dequeue flags to psi callbacks directly (Johannes
     Weiner)

  Preparatory patches for proxy execution:

   - Add move_queued_task_locked helper (Connor O'Brien)

   - Consolidate pick_*_task to task_is_pushable helper (Connor O'Brien)

   - Split out __schedule() deactivate task logic into a helper (John
     Stultz)

   - Split scheduler and execution contexts (Peter Zijlstra)

   - Make mutex::wait_lock irq safe (Juri Lelli)

   - Expose __mutex_owner() (Juri Lelli)

   - Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock (Peter Zijlstra)

  Misc fixes and cleanups:

   - Remove unused __HAVE_THREAD_FUNCTIONS hook support (David
     Disseldorp)

   - Update the comment for TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY (Sebastian Andrzej
     Siewior)

   - Remove unused bit_wait_io_timeout (Dr. David Alan Gilbert)

   - remove the DOUBLE_TICK feature (Huang Shijie)

   - fix the comment for PREEMPT_SHORT (Huang Shijie)

   - Fix unnused variable warning (Christian Loehle)

   - No PREEMPT_RT=y for all{yes,mod}config"

* tag 'sched-core-2024-11-18' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: (33 commits)
  sched, x86: Update the comment for TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY.
  sched: No PREEMPT_RT=y for all{yes,mod}config
  riscv: add PREEMPT_LAZY support
  sched, x86: Enable Lazy preemption
  sched: Enable PREEMPT_DYNAMIC for PREEMPT_RT
  sched: Add Lazy preemption model
  sched: Add TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY infrastructure
  sched/ext: Remove sched_fork() hack
  sched: Initialize idle tasks only once
  sched: psi: pass enqueue/dequeue flags to psi callbacks directly
  sched/uclamp: Fix unnused variable warning
  sched: Split scheduler and execution contexts
  sched: Split out __schedule() deactivate task logic into a helper
  sched: Consolidate pick_*_task to task_is_pushable helper
  sched: Add move_queued_task_locked helper
  locking/mutex: Expose __mutex_owner()
  locking/mutex: Make mutex::wait_lock irq safe
  locking/mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock
  sched: Improve cache locality of RSEQ concurrency IDs for intermittent workloads
  sched: idle: Optimize the generic idle loop by removing needless memory barrier
  ...

locking/rtmutex: Fix misleading comment

2024-10-24T21:03:30+00:00

Going through the RCU-boost and rtmutex code, I ran into this utterly
confusing comment. Fix it to avoid confusing future readers.

[ tglx: Wordsmithed the comment ]

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Reviewed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241008092606.GJ33184@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net

locking/mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock

2024-10-14T10:52:40+00:00

In preparation to nest mutex::wait_lock under rq::lock we need
to remove wakeups from under it.

Do this by utilizing wake_qs to defer the wakeup until after the
lock is dropped.

[Heavily changed after 55f036ca7e74 ("locking: WW mutex cleanup") and
08295b3b5bee ("locking: Implement an algorithm choice for Wound-Wait
mutexes")]
[jstultz: rebased to mainline, added extra wake_up_q & init
 to avoid hangs, similar to Connor's rework of this patch]

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli 
Signed-off-by: John Stultz 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Reviewed-by: Metin Kaya 
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso 
Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak 
Tested-by: Metin Kaya 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241009235352.1614323-2-jstultz@google.com

locking/rtmutex: Fix task->pi_waiters integrity

2023-07-17T11:59:10+00:00

Henry reported that rt_mutex_adjust_prio_check() has an ordering
problem and puts the lie to the comment in [7]. Sharing the sort key
between lock->waiters and owner->pi_waiters *does* create problems,
since unlike what the comment claims, holding [L] is insufficient.

Notably, consider:

	A
      /   \
     M1   M2
     |     |
     B     C

That is, task A owns both M1 and M2, B and C block on them. In this
case a concurrent chain walk (B & C) will modify their resp. sort keys
in [7] while holding M1->wait_lock and M2->wait_lock. So holding [L]
is meaningless, they're different Ls.

This then gives rise to a race condition between [7] and [11], where
the requeue of pi_waiters will observe an inconsistent tree order.

	B				C

  (holds M1->wait_lock,		(holds M2->wait_lock,
   holds B->pi_lock)		 holds A->pi_lock)

  [7]
  waiter_update_prio();
  ...
  [8]
  raw_spin_unlock(B->pi_lock);
  ...
  [10]
  raw_spin_lock(A->pi_lock);

				[11]
				rt_mutex_enqueue_pi();
				// observes inconsistent A->pi_waiters
				// tree order

Fixing this means either extending the range of the owner lock from
[10-13] to [6-13], with the immediate problem that this means [6-8]
hold both blocked and owner locks, or duplicating the sort key.

Since the locking in chain walk is horrible enough without having to
consider pi_lock nesting rules, duplicate the sort key instead.

By giving each tree their own sort key, the above race becomes
harmless, if C sees B at the old location, then B will correct things
(if they need correcting) when it walks up the chain and reaches A.

Fixes: fb00aca47440 ("rtmutex: Turn the plist into an rb-tree")
Reported-by: Henry Wu 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Tested-by: Henry Wu 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230707161052.GF2883469%40hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net

rtmutex: Add acquire semantics for rtmutex lock acquisition slow path

2022-12-12T18:55:56+00:00

Jan Kara reported the following bug triggering on 6.0.5-rt14 running dbench
on XFS on arm64.

 kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:625!
 Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] PREEMPT_RT SMP
 CPU: 11 PID: 6611 Comm: dbench Tainted: G            E   6.0.0-rt14-rt+ #1
 pc : clear_inode+0xa0/0xc0
 lr : clear_inode+0x38/0xc0
 Call trace:
  clear_inode+0xa0/0xc0
  evict+0x160/0x180
  iput+0x154/0x240
  do_unlinkat+0x184/0x300
  __arm64_sys_unlinkat+0x48/0xc0
  el0_svc_common.constprop.4+0xe4/0x2c0
  do_el0_svc+0xac/0x100
  el0_svc+0x78/0x200
  el0t_64_sync_handler+0x9c/0xc0
  el0t_64_sync+0x19c/0x1a0

It also affects 6.1-rc7-rt5 and affects a preempt-rt fork of 5.14 so this
is likely a bug that existed forever and only became visible when ARM
support was added to preempt-rt. The same problem does not occur on x86-64
and he also reported that converting sb->s_inode_wblist_lock to
raw_spinlock_t makes the problem disappear indicating that the RT spinlock
variant is the problem.

Which in turn means that RT mutexes on ARM64 and any other weakly ordered
architecture are affected by this independent of RT.

Will Deacon observed:

  "I'd be more inclined to be suspicious of the slowpath tbh, as we need to
   make sure that we have acquire semantics on all paths where the lock can
   be taken. Looking at the rtmutex code, this really isn't obvious to me
   -- for example, try_to_take_rt_mutex() appears to be able to return via
   the 'takeit' label without acquire semantics and it looks like we might
   be relying on the caller's subsequent _unlock_ of the wait_lock for
   ordering, but that will give us release semantics which aren't correct."

Sebastian Andrzej Siewior prototyped a fix that does work based on that
comment but it was a little bit overkill and added some fences that should
not be necessary.

The lock owner is updated with an IRQ-safe raw spinlock held, but the
spin_unlock does not provide acquire semantics which are needed when
acquiring a mutex.

Adds the necessary acquire semantics for lock owner updates in the slow path
acquisition and the waiter bit logic.

It successfully completed 10 iterations of the dbench workload while the
vanilla kernel fails on the first iteration.

[ bigeasy@linutronix.de: Initial prototype fix ]

Fixes: 700318d1d7b38 ("locking/rtmutex: Use acquire/release semantics")
Fixes: 23f78d4a03c5 ("[PATCH] pi-futex: rt mutex core")
Reported-by: Jan Kara 
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman 
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221202100223.6mevpbl7i6x5udfd@techsingularity.net

locking/rtmutex: Add rt_mutex_lock_nest_lock() and rt_mutex_lock_killable().

2021-12-04T09:56:23+00:00

The locking selftest for ww-mutex expects to operate directly on the
base-mutex which becomes a rtmutex on PREEMPT_RT.

Add a rtmutex based implementation of mutex_lock_nest_lock() and
mutex_lock_killable() named rt_mutex_lock_nest_lock() abd
rt_mutex_lock_killable().

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211129174654.668506-5-bigeasy@linutronix.de

locking/rtmutex: Prevent lockdep false positive with PI futexes

2021-08-17T17:06:02+00:00

On PREEMPT_RT the futex hashbucket spinlock becomes 'sleeping' and rtmutex
based. That causes a lockdep false positive because some of the futex
functions invoke spin_unlock(&hb->lock) with the wait_lock of the rtmutex
associated to the pi_futex held.  spin_unlock() in turn takes wait_lock of
the rtmutex on which the spinlock is based which makes lockdep notice a
lock recursion.

Give the futex/rtmutex wait_lock a separate key.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.750701219@linutronix.de

locking/rtmutex: Add mutex variant for RT

2021-08-17T17:05:29+00:00

Add the necessary defines, helpers and API functions for replacing struct mutex on
a PREEMPT_RT enabled kernel with an rtmutex based variant.

No functional change when CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT=n

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.081517417@linutronix.de

locking/rtmutex: Extend the rtmutex core to support ww_mutex

2021-08-17T17:05:23+00:00

Add a ww acquire context pointer to the waiter and various functions and
add the ww_mutex related invocations to the proper spots in the locking
code, similar to the mutex based variant.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.966139174@linutronix.de

locking/rtmutex: Guard regular sleeping locks specific functions

2021-08-17T15:23:27+00:00

Guard the regular sleeping lock specific functionality, which is used for
rtmutex on non-RT enabled kernels and for mutex, rtmutex and semaphores on
RT enabled kernels so the code can be reused for the RT specific
implementation of spinlocks and rwlocks in a different compilation unit.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.311535693@linutronix.de