Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: Fix invalid context warning when enable srcu barrier testing

From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Wed Mar 27 2024 - 14:34:15 EST

Next message: Gustavo A. R. Silva: "Re: [PATCH v2][next] wifi: wil6210: Annotate a couple of structs with __counted_by()"
Previous message: Joao Martins: "Re: [PATCH] selftests: iommu: add config needed for iommufd_fail_nth"
In reply to: Z qiang: "Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: Fix invalid context warning when enable srcu barrier testing"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 05:40:07PM +0800, Z qiang wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:52:19PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> > > When the torture_type is set srcu or srcud and cb_barrier is
> > > non-zero, running the rcutorture test will trigger the
> > > following warning:
> > >
> > > [ 163.910989][ C1] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:48
> > > [ 163.910994][ C1] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, non_block: 0, pid: 0, name: swapper/1
> > > [ 163.910999][ C1] preempt_count: 10001, expected: 0
> > > [ 163.911002][ C1] RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
> > > [ 163.911005][ C1] INFO: lockdep is turned off.
> > > [ 163.911007][ C1] irq event stamp: 30964
> > > [ 163.911010][ C1] hardirqs last enabled at (30963): [<ffffffffabc7df52>] do_idle+0x362/0x500
> > > [ 163.911018][ C1] hardirqs last disabled at (30964): [<ffffffffae616eff>] sysvec_call_function_single+0xf/0xd0
> > > [ 163.911025][ C1] softirqs last enabled at (0): [<ffffffffabb6475f>] copy_process+0x16ff/0x6580
> > > [ 163.911033][ C1] softirqs last disabled at (0): [<0000000000000000>] 0x0
> > > [ 163.911038][ C1] Preemption disabled at:
> > > [ 163.911039][ C1] [<ffffffffacf1964b>] stack_depot_save_flags+0x24b/0x6c0
> > > [ 163.911063][ C1] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Tainted: G W 6.8.0-rc4-rt4-yocto-preempt-rt+ #3 1e39aa9a737dd024a3275c4f835a872f673a7d3a
> > > [ 163.911071][ C1] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS rel-1.16.2-0-gea1b7a073390-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
> > > [ 163.911075][ C1] Call Trace:
> > > [ 163.911078][ C1] <IRQ>
> > > [ 163.911080][ C1] dump_stack_lvl+0x88/0xd0
> > > [ 163.911089][ C1] dump_stack+0x10/0x20
> > > [ 163.911095][ C1] __might_resched+0x36f/0x530
> > > [ 163.911105][ C1] rt_spin_lock+0x82/0x1c0
> > > [ 163.911112][ C1] spin_lock_irqsave_ssp_contention+0xb8/0x100
> > > [ 163.911121][ C1] srcu_gp_start_if_needed+0x782/0xf00
> > > [ 163.911128][ C1] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x46/0x70
> > > [ 163.911136][ C1] ? debug_object_active_state+0x336/0x470
> > > [ 163.911148][ C1] ? __pfx_srcu_gp_start_if_needed+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 163.911156][ C1] ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 163.911165][ C1] ? __pfx_rcu_torture_barrier_cbf+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 163.911188][ C1] __call_srcu+0x9f/0xe0
> > > [ 163.911196][ C1] call_srcu+0x13/0x20
> > > [ 163.911201][ C1] srcu_torture_call+0x1b/0x30
> > > [ 163.911224][ C1] rcu_torture_barrier1cb+0x4a/0x60
> > > [ 163.911247][ C1] __flush_smp_call_function_queue+0x267/0xca0
> > > [ 163.911256][ C1] ? __pfx_rcu_torture_barrier1cb+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 163.911281][ C1] generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt+0x13/0x20
> > > [ 163.911288][ C1] __sysvec_call_function_single+0x7d/0x280
> > > [ 163.911295][ C1] sysvec_call_function_single+0x93/0xd0
> > > [ 163.911302][ C1] </IRQ>
> > > [ 163.911304][ C1] <TASK>
> > > [ 163.911308][ C1] asm_sysvec_call_function_single+0x1b/0x20
> > > [ 163.911313][ C1] RIP: 0010:default_idle+0x17/0x20
> > > [ 163.911326][ C1] RSP: 0018:ffff888001997dc8 EFLAGS: 00000246
> > > [ 163.911333][ C1] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: ffffffffae618b51
> > > [ 163.911337][ C1] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffffaea80920 RDI: ffffffffaec2de80
> > > [ 163.911342][ C1] RBP: ffff888001997dc8 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed100d740cad
> > > [ 163.911346][ C1] R10: ffffed100d740cac R11: ffff88806ba06563 R12: 0000000000000001
> > > [ 163.911350][ C1] R13: ffffffffafe460c0 R14: ffffffffafe460c0 R15: 0000000000000000
> > > [ 163.911358][ C1] ? ct_kernel_exit.constprop.3+0x121/0x160
> > > [ 163.911369][ C1] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0xc4/0x150
> > > [ 163.911376][ C1] arch_cpu_idle+0x9/0x10
> > > [ 163.911383][ C1] default_idle_call+0x7a/0xb0
> > > [ 163.911390][ C1] do_idle+0x362/0x500
> > > [ 163.911398][ C1] ? __pfx_do_idle+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 163.911404][ C1] ? complete_with_flags+0x8b/0xb0
> > > [ 163.911416][ C1] cpu_startup_entry+0x58/0x70
> > > [ 163.911423][ C1] start_secondary+0x221/0x280
> > > [ 163.911430][ C1] ? __pfx_start_secondary+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 163.911440][ C1] secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0x17f/0x18b
> > > [ 163.911455][ C1] </TASK>
> > >
> > > This commit therefore use smp_call_on_cpu() instead of
> > > smp_call_function_single(), make rcu_torture_barrier1cb() invoked
> > > happens on task-context.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Huh. The use of non-raw spinlocks does constrain call_rcu() use, doesn't
> > it? Good catch!
>
> Yes, This problem happens in the srcu rcutorture test under the
> Preempt-RT kernel.
>
> > Queued for testing and further review. Are there any uses of call_srcu()
> > out there that are unsafe on -rt?
>
> I'm running rcutorture tests under the RT-kernel these days, and I haven't found
> any others yet. :)

Very good, and glad that you are doing RT rcutorture testing.

Thanx, Paul

> Thanks
> Zqiang
>
> >
> > Thanx, Paul
> >
> > > ---
> > > kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c | 9 ++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > > index 48a9d47ec90e..498aae52333e 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > > @@ -3041,11 +3041,12 @@ static void rcu_torture_barrier_cbf(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> > > }
> > >
> > > /* IPI handler to get callback posted on desired CPU, if online. */
> > > -static void rcu_torture_barrier1cb(void *rcu_void)
> > > +static int rcu_torture_barrier1cb(void *rcu_void)
> > > {
> > > struct rcu_head *rhp = rcu_void;
> > >
> > > cur_ops->call(rhp, rcu_torture_barrier_cbf);
> > > + return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > /* kthread function to register callbacks used to test RCU barriers. */
> > > @@ -3071,11 +3072,9 @@ static int rcu_torture_barrier_cbs(void *arg)
> > > * The above smp_load_acquire() ensures barrier_phase load
> > > * is ordered before the following ->call().
> > > */
> > > - if (smp_call_function_single(myid, rcu_torture_barrier1cb,
> > > - &rcu, 1)) {
> > > - // IPI failed, so use direct call from current CPU.
> > > + if (smp_call_on_cpu(myid, rcu_torture_barrier1cb, &rcu, 1))
> > > cur_ops->call(&rcu, rcu_torture_barrier_cbf);
> > > - }
> > > +
> > > if (atomic_dec_and_test(&barrier_cbs_count))
> > > wake_up(&barrier_wq);
> > > } while (!torture_must_stop());
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1
> > >

Next message: Gustavo A. R. Silva: "Re: [PATCH v2][next] wifi: wil6210: Annotate a couple of structs with __counted_by()"
Previous message: Joao Martins: "Re: [PATCH] selftests: iommu: add config needed for iommufd_fail_nth"
In reply to: Z qiang: "Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: Fix invalid context warning when enable srcu barrier testing"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]