058ebd0eba
Jiri managed to trigger this warning: [] ====================================================== [] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] [] 3.10.0+ #228 Tainted: G W [] ------------------------------------------------------- [] p/6613 is trying to acquire lock: [] (rcu_node_0){..-...}, at: [<ffffffff810ca797>] rcu_read_unlock_special+0xa7/0x250 [] [] but task is already holding lock: [] (&ctx->lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff810f2879>] perf_lock_task_context+0xd9/0x2c0 [] [] which lock already depends on the new lock. [] [] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: [] [] -> #4 (&ctx->lock){-.-...}: [] -> #3 (&rq->lock){-.-.-.}: [] -> #2 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.-.}: [] -> #1 (&rnp->nocb_gp_wq[1]){......}: [] -> #0 (rcu_node_0){..-...}: Paul was quick to explain that due to preemptible RCU we cannot call rcu_read_unlock() while holding scheduler (or nested) locks when part of the read side critical section was preemptible. Therefore solve it by making the entire RCU read side non-preemptible. Also pull out the retry from under the non-preempt to play nice with RT. Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> Helped-out-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: <stable@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| Makefile | ||
| callchain.c | ||
| core.c | ||
| hw_breakpoint.c | ||
| internal.h | ||
| ring_buffer.c | ||
| uprobes.c | ||