Commit 6971c0f3 authored by Boqun Feng's avatar Boqun Feng Committed by Peter Zijlstra

lockdep: Extend __bfs() to work with multiple types of dependencies

Now we have four types of dependencies in the dependency graph, and not
all the pathes carry real dependencies (the dependencies that may cause
a deadlock), for example:

	Given lock A and B, if we have:

	CPU1			CPU2
	=============		==============
	write_lock(A);		read_lock(B);
	read_lock(B);		write_lock(A);

	(assuming read_lock(B) is a recursive reader)

	then we have dependencies A -(ER)-> B, and B -(SN)-> A, and a
	dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A.

	In lockdep w/o recursive locks, a dependency path from A to A
	means a deadlock. However, the above case is obviously not a
	deadlock, because no one holds B exclusively, therefore no one
	waits for the other to release B, so who get A first in CPU1 and
	CPU2 will run non-blockingly.

	As a result, dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A is not a
	real/strong dependency that could cause a deadlock.

From the observation above, we know that for a dependency path to be
real/strong, no two adjacent dependencies can be as -(*R)-> -(S*)->.

Now our mission is to make __bfs() traverse only the strong dependency
paths, which is simple: we record whether we only have -(*R)-> for the
previous lock_list of the path in lock_list::only_xr, and when we pick a
dependency in the traverse, we 1) filter out -(S*)-> dependency if the
previous lock_list only has -(*R)-> dependency (i.e. ->only_xr is true)
and 2) set the next lock_list::only_xr to true if we only have -(*R)->
left after we filter out dependencies based on 1), otherwise, set it to
false.

With this extension for __bfs(), we now need to initialize the root of
__bfs() properly (with a correct ->only_xr), to do so, we introduce some
helper functions, which also cleans up a little bit for the __bfs() root
initialization code.
Signed-off-by: default avatarBoqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-8-boqun.feng@gmail.com
parent 3454a36d
......@@ -57,6 +57,8 @@ struct lock_list {
u16 distance;
/* bitmap of different dependencies from head to this */
u8 dep;
/* used by BFS to record whether "prev -> this" only has -(*R)-> */
u8 only_xr;
/*
* The parent field is used to implement breadth-first search, and the
......
......@@ -1551,8 +1551,72 @@ static inline u8 calc_depb(struct held_lock *prev, struct held_lock *next)
}
/*
* Forward- or backward-dependency search, used for both circular dependency
* checking and hardirq-unsafe/softirq-unsafe checking.
* Initialize a lock_list entry @lock belonging to @class as the root for a BFS
* search.
*/
static inline void __bfs_init_root(struct lock_list *lock,
struct lock_class *class)
{
lock->class = class;
lock->parent = NULL;
lock->only_xr = 0;
}
/*
* Initialize a lock_list entry @lock based on a lock acquisition @hlock as the
* root for a BFS search.
*
* ->only_xr of the initial lock node is set to @hlock->read == 2, to make sure
* that <prev> -> @hlock and @hlock -> <whatever __bfs() found> is not -(*R)->
* and -(S*)->.
*/
static inline void bfs_init_root(struct lock_list *lock,
struct held_lock *hlock)
{
__bfs_init_root(lock, hlock_class(hlock));
lock->only_xr = (hlock->read == 2);
}
/*
* Similar to bfs_init_root() but initialize the root for backwards BFS.
*
* ->only_xr of the initial lock node is set to @hlock->read != 0, to make sure
* that <next> -> @hlock and @hlock -> <whatever backwards BFS found> is not
* -(*S)-> and -(R*)-> (reverse order of -(*R)-> and -(S*)->).
*/
static inline void bfs_init_rootb(struct lock_list *lock,
struct held_lock *hlock)
{
__bfs_init_root(lock, hlock_class(hlock));
lock->only_xr = (hlock->read != 0);
}
/*
* Breadth-First Search to find a strong path in the dependency graph.
*
* @source_entry: the source of the path we are searching for.
* @data: data used for the second parameter of @match function
* @match: match function for the search
* @target_entry: pointer to the target of a matched path
* @offset: the offset to struct lock_class to determine whether it is
* locks_after or locks_before
*
* We may have multiple edges (considering different kinds of dependencies,
* e.g. ER and SN) between two nodes in the dependency graph. But
* only the strong dependency path in the graph is relevant to deadlocks. A
* strong dependency path is a dependency path that doesn't have two adjacent
* dependencies as -(*R)-> -(S*)->, please see:
*
* Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst
*
* for more explanation of the definition of strong dependency paths
*
* In __bfs(), we only traverse in the strong dependency path:
*
* In lock_list::only_xr, we record whether the previous dependency only
* has -(*R)-> in the search, and if it does (prev only has -(*R)->), we
* filter out any -(S*)-> in the current dependency and after that, the
* ->only_xr is set according to whether we only have -(*R)-> left.
*/
static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list *source_entry,
void *data,
......@@ -1582,6 +1646,7 @@ static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list *source_entry,
__cq_enqueue(cq, source_entry);
while ((lock = __cq_dequeue(cq))) {
bool prev_only_xr;
if (!lock->class) {
ret = BFS_EINVALIDNODE;
......@@ -1602,10 +1667,26 @@ static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list *source_entry,
head = get_dep_list(lock, offset);
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled());
prev_only_xr = lock->only_xr;
list_for_each_entry_rcu(entry, head, entry) {
unsigned int cq_depth;
u8 dep = entry->dep;
/*
* Mask out all -(S*)-> if we only have *R in previous
* step, because -(*R)-> -(S*)-> don't make up a strong
* dependency.
*/
if (prev_only_xr)
dep &= ~(DEP_SR_MASK | DEP_SN_MASK);
/* If nothing left, we skip */
if (!dep)
continue;
/* If there are only -(*R)-> left, set that for the next step */
entry->only_xr = !(dep & (DEP_SN_MASK | DEP_EN_MASK));
visit_lock_entry(entry, lock);
if (match(entry, data)) {
......@@ -1827,8 +1908,7 @@ unsigned long lockdep_count_forward_deps(struct lock_class *class)
unsigned long ret, flags;
struct lock_list this;
this.parent = NULL;
this.class = class;
__bfs_init_root(&this, class);
raw_local_irq_save(flags);
lockdep_lock();
......@@ -1854,8 +1934,7 @@ unsigned long lockdep_count_backward_deps(struct lock_class *class)
unsigned long ret, flags;
struct lock_list this;
this.parent = NULL;
this.class = class;
__bfs_init_root(&this, class);
raw_local_irq_save(flags);
lockdep_lock();
......@@ -1898,10 +1977,9 @@ check_noncircular(struct held_lock *src, struct held_lock *target,
{
enum bfs_result ret;
struct lock_list *target_entry;
struct lock_list src_entry = {
.class = hlock_class(src),
.parent = NULL,
};
struct lock_list src_entry;
bfs_init_root(&src_entry, src);
debug_atomic_inc(nr_cyclic_checks);
......@@ -1937,10 +2015,9 @@ check_redundant(struct held_lock *src, struct held_lock *target)
{
enum bfs_result ret;
struct lock_list *target_entry;
struct lock_list src_entry = {
.class = hlock_class(src),
.parent = NULL,
};
struct lock_list src_entry;
bfs_init_root(&src_entry, src);
debug_atomic_inc(nr_redundant_checks);
......@@ -3556,8 +3633,7 @@ check_usage_forwards(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
struct lock_list root;
struct lock_list *target_entry;
root.parent = NULL;
root.class = hlock_class(this);
bfs_init_root(&root, this);
ret = find_usage_forwards(&root, lock_flag(bit), &target_entry);
if (bfs_error(ret)) {
print_bfs_bug(ret);
......@@ -3583,8 +3659,7 @@ check_usage_backwards(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
struct lock_list root;
struct lock_list *target_entry;
root.parent = NULL;
root.class = hlock_class(this);
bfs_init_rootb(&root, this);
ret = find_usage_backwards(&root, lock_flag(bit), &target_entry);
if (bfs_error(ret)) {
print_bfs_bug(ret);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment