mirror of
https://github.com/AuxXxilium/linux_dsm_epyc7002.git
synced 2024-11-25 19:31:09 +07:00
sched, time: Fix lock inversion in thread_group_cputime()
The sig->stats_lock nests inside the tasklist_lock and the sighand->siglock in __exit_signal and wait_task_zombie. However, both of those locks can be taken from irq context, which means we need to use the interrupt safe variant of read_seqbegin_or_lock. This blocks interrupts when the "lock" branch is taken (seq is odd), preventing the lock inversion. On the first (lockless) pass through the loop, irqs are not blocked. Reported-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: prarit@redhat.com Cc: oleg@redhat.com Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1410527535-9814-3-git-send-email-riel@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
ef8ac06359
commit
9c368b5b6e
@ -289,13 +289,14 @@ void thread_group_cputime(struct task_struct *tsk, struct task_cputime *times)
|
||||
cputime_t utime, stime;
|
||||
struct task_struct *t;
|
||||
unsigned int seq, nextseq;
|
||||
unsigned long flags;
|
||||
|
||||
rcu_read_lock();
|
||||
/* Attempt a lockless read on the first round. */
|
||||
nextseq = 0;
|
||||
do {
|
||||
seq = nextseq;
|
||||
read_seqbegin_or_lock(&sig->stats_lock, &seq);
|
||||
flags = read_seqbegin_or_lock_irqsave(&sig->stats_lock, &seq);
|
||||
times->utime = sig->utime;
|
||||
times->stime = sig->stime;
|
||||
times->sum_exec_runtime = sig->sum_sched_runtime;
|
||||
@ -309,7 +310,7 @@ void thread_group_cputime(struct task_struct *tsk, struct task_cputime *times)
|
||||
/* If lockless access failed, take the lock. */
|
||||
nextseq = 1;
|
||||
} while (need_seqretry(&sig->stats_lock, seq));
|
||||
done_seqretry(&sig->stats_lock, seq);
|
||||
done_seqretry_irqrestore(&sig->stats_lock, seq, flags);
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user