Currently the call_rcu() API does not check whether a callback pointer is NULL. If NULL is passed, rcu_core() will try to invoke it, resulting in NULL pointer dereference and a kernel crash. To prevent this and improve debuggability, this patch adds a check for NULL and emits a kernel stack trace to help identify a faulty caller. Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
Currently, the ->gpwrap is not tested (at all per my testing) due to the requirement of a large delta between a CPU's rdp->gp_seq and its node's rnp->gpseq. This results in no testing of ->gpwrap being set. This patch by default adds 5 minutes of testing with ->gpwrap forced by lowering the delta between rdp->gp_seq and rnp->gp_seq to just 8 GPs. All of this is configurable, including the active time for the setting and a full testing cycle. By default, the first 25 minutes of a test will have the _default_ behavior there is right now (ULONG_MAX / 4) delta. Then for 5 minutes, we switch to a smaller delta causing 1-2 wraps in 5 minutes. I believe this is reasonable since we at least add a little bit of testing for usecases where ->gpwrap is set. [ Apply fix for Dan Carpenter's bug report on init path cleanup. ] [ Apply kernel doc warning fix from Akira Yokosawa. ] Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
When counting the number of hardirqs in the x86 architecture,
it is essential to add arch_irq_stat_cpu to ensure accuracy.
For example, a CPU loop within the rcu_read_lock function.
Before:
[ 70.910184] rcu: INFO: rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU
[ 70.910436] rcu: 3-....: (4999 ticks this GP) idle=***
[ 70.910711] rcu: hardirqs softirqs csw/system
[ 70.910870] rcu: number: 0 657 0
[ 70.911024] rcu: cputime: 0 0 2498 ==> 2498(ms)
[ 70.911278] rcu: (t=5001 jiffies g=3677 q=29 ncpus=8)
After:
[ 68.046132] rcu: INFO: rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU
[ 68.046354] rcu: 2-....: (4999 ticks this GP) idle=***
[ 68.046628] rcu: hardirqs softirqs csw/system
[ 68.046793] rcu: number: 2498 663 0
[ 68.046951] rcu: cputime: 0 0 2496 ==> 2496(ms)
[ 68.047244] rcu: (t=5000 jiffies g=3825 q=4 ncpus=8)
Fixes: be42f00b73a0 ("rcu: Add RCU stall diagnosis information")
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202501090842.SfI6QPGS-lkp@intel.com/
Signed-off-by: Yongliang Gao <leonylgao@tencent.com>
Reviewed-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250216084109.3109837-1-leonylgao@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
It's now ok to perform a wake-up from an offline CPU because the resulting armed scheduler bandwidth hrtimers are now correctly targeted by hrtimer infrastructure. Remove the obsolete hackerry. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241231170712.149394-3-frederic@kernel.org/ Reviewed-by: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
The previous patch improved the rcu_seq_done_exact() function by adding a meaningful constant for the guardband. Ensure that this is working for the future by a quick check during rcu_gp_init(). Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
Pull RCU updates from Boqun Feng:
"Documentation:
- Add broken-timing possibility to stallwarn.rst
- Improve discussion of this_cpu_ptr(), add raw_cpu_ptr()
- Document self-propagating callbacks
- Point call_srcu() to call_rcu() for detailed memory ordering
- Add CONFIG_RCU_LAZY delays to call_rcu() kernel-doc header
- Clarify RCU_LAZY and RCU_LAZY_DEFAULT_OFF help text
- Remove references to old grace-period-wait primitives
srcu:
- Introduce srcu_read_{un,}lock_fast(), which is similar to
srcu_read_{un,}lock_lite(): avoid smp_mb()s in lock and unlock
at the cost of calling synchronize_rcu() in synchronize_srcu()
Moreover, by returning the percpu offset of the counter at
srcu_read_lock_fast() time, srcu_read_unlock_fast() can avoid
extra pointer dereferencing, which makes it faster than
srcu_read_{un,}lock_lite()
srcu_read_{un,}lock_fast() are intended to replace
rcu_read_{un,}lock_trace() if possible
RCU torture:
- Add get_torture_init_jiffies() to return the start time of the test
- Add a test_boost_holdoff module parameter to allow delaying
boosting tests when building rcutorture as built-in
- Add grace period sequence number logging at the beginning and end
of failure/close-call results
- Switch to hexadecimal for the expedited grace period sequence
number in the rcu_exp_grace_period trace point
- Make cur_ops->format_gp_seqs take buffer length
- Move RCU_TORTURE_TEST_{CHK_RDR_STATE,LOG_CPU} to bool
- Complain when invalid SRCU reader_flavor is specified
- Add FORCE_NEED_SRCU_NMI_SAFE Kconfig for testing, which forces SRCU
uses atomics even when percpu ops are NMI safe, and use the Kconfig
for SRCU lockdep testing
Misc:
- Split rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult() mask parameter and use for tracing
- Remove READ_ONCE() for rdp->gpwrap access in __note_gp_changes()
- Fix get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() GP-start detection
- Move RCU Tasks self-tests to core_initcall()
- Print segment lengths in show_rcu_nocb_gp_state()
- Make RCU watch ct_kernel_exit_state() warning
- Flush console log from kernel_power_off()
- rcutorture: Allow a negative value for nfakewriters
- rcu: Update TREE05.boot to test normal synchronize_rcu()
- rcu: Use _full() API to debug synchronize_rcu()
Make RCU handle PREEMPT_LAZY better:
- Fix header guard for rcu_all_qs()
- rcu: Rename PREEMPT_AUTO to PREEMPT_LAZY
- Update __cond_resched comment about RCU quiescent states
- Handle unstable rdp in rcu_read_unlock_strict()
- Handle quiescent states for PREEMPT_RCU=n, PREEMPT_COUNT=y
- osnoise: Provide quiescent states
- Adjust rcutorture with possible PREEMPT_RCU=n && PREEMPT_COUNT=y
combination
- Limit PREEMPT_RCU configurations
- Make rcutorture senario TREE07 and senario TREE10 use
PREEMPT_LAZY=y"
* tag 'rcu-next-v6.15' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rcu/linux: (59 commits)
rcutorture: Make scenario TREE07 build CONFIG_PREEMPT_LAZY=y
rcutorture: Make scenario TREE10 build CONFIG_PREEMPT_LAZY=y
rcu: limit PREEMPT_RCU configurations
rcutorture: Update ->extendables check for lazy preemption
rcutorture: Update rcutorture_one_extend_check() for lazy preemption
osnoise: provide quiescent states
rcu: Use _full() API to debug synchronize_rcu()
rcu: Update TREE05.boot to test normal synchronize_rcu()
rcutorture: Allow a negative value for nfakewriters
Flush console log from kernel_power_off()
context_tracking: Make RCU watch ct_kernel_exit_state() warning
rcu/nocb: Print segment lengths in show_rcu_nocb_gp_state()
rcu-tasks: Move RCU Tasks self-tests to core_initcall()
rcu: Fix get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() GP-start detection
torture: Make SRCU lockdep testing use srcu_read_lock_nmisafe()
srcu: Add FORCE_NEED_SRCU_NMI_SAFE Kconfig for testing
rcutorture: Complain when invalid SRCU reader_flavor is specified
rcutorture: Move RCU_TORTURE_TEST_{CHK_RDR_STATE,LOG_CPU} to bool
rcutorture: Make cur_ops->format_gp_seqs take buffer length
rcutorture: Add ftrace-compatible timestamp to GP# failure/close-call output
...
Switch for using of get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() and
poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() pair to debug a normal
synchronize_rcu() call.
Just using "not" full APIs to identify if a grace period is
passed or not might lead to a false-positive kernel splat.
It can happen, because get_state_synchronize_rcu() compresses
both normal and expedited states into one single unsigned long
value, so a poll_state_synchronize_rcu() can miss GP-completion
when synchronize_rcu()/synchronize_rcu_expedited() concurrently
run.
To address this, switch to poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() and
get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() APIs, which use separate variables
for expedited and normal states.
Reported-by: cheung wall <zzqq0103.hey@gmail.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Z5ikQeVmVdsWQrdD@pc636/T/
Fixes: 988f569ae041 ("rcu: Reduce synchronize_rcu() latency")
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250227131613.52683-3-urezki@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
The get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() and poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full()
functions use the root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field to detect
the beginnings and ends of grace periods, respectively. This choice is
necessary for the poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function because
(give or take counter wrap), the following sequence is guaranteed not
to trigger:
get_state_synchronize_rcu_full(&rgos);
synchronize_rcu();
WARN_ON_ONCE(!poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full(&rgos));
The RCU callbacks that awaken synchronize_rcu() instances are
guaranteed not to be invoked before the root rcu_node structure's
->gp_seq field is updated to indicate the end of the grace period.
However, these callbacks might start being invoked immediately
thereafter, in particular, before rcu_state.gp_seq has been updated.
Therefore, poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() must refer to the
root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field. Because this field is
updated under this structure's ->lock, any code following a call to
poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() will be fully ordered after the
full grace-period computation, as is required by RCU's memory-ordering
semantics.
By symmetry, the get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function should also
use this same root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field. But it turns out
that symmetry is profoundly (though extremely infrequently) destructive
in this case. To see this, consider the following sequence of events:
1. CPU 0 starts a new grace period, and updates rcu_state.gp_seq
accordingly.
2. As its first step of grace-period initialization, CPU 0 examines
the current CPU hotplug state and decides that it need not wait
for CPU 1, which is currently offline.
3. CPU 1 comes online, and updates its state. But this does not
affect the current grace period, but rather the one after that.
After all, CPU 1 was offline when the current grace period
started, so all pre-existing RCU readers on CPU 1 must have
completed or been preempted before it last went offline.
The current grace period therefore has nothing it needs to wait
for on CPU 1.
4. CPU 1 switches to an rcutorture kthread which is running
rcutorture's rcu_torture_reader() function, which starts a new
RCU reader.
5. CPU 2 is running rcutorture's rcu_torture_writer() function
and collects a new polled grace-period "cookie" using
get_state_synchronize_rcu_full(). Because the newly started
grace period has not completed initialization, the root rcu_node
structure's ->gp_seq field has not yet been updated to indicate
that this new grace period has already started.
This cookie is therefore set up for the end of the current grace
period (rather than the end of the following grace period).
6. CPU 0 finishes grace-period initialization.
7. If CPU 1’s rcutorture reader is preempted, it will be added to
the ->blkd_tasks list, but because CPU 1’s ->qsmask bit is not
set in CPU 1's leaf rcu_node structure, the ->gp_tasks pointer
will not be updated. Thus, this grace period will not wait on
it. Which is only fair, given that the CPU did not come online
until after the grace period officially started.
8. CPUs 0 and 2 then detect the new grace period and then report
a quiescent state to the RCU core.
9. Because CPU 1 was offline at the start of the current grace
period, CPUs 0 and 2 are the only CPUs that this grace period
needs to wait on. So the grace period ends and post-grace-period
cleanup starts. In particular, the root rcu_node structure's
->gp_seq field is updated to indicate that this grace period
has now ended.
10. CPU 2 continues running rcu_torture_writer() and sees that,
from the viewpoint of the root rcu_node structure consulted by
the poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function, the grace period
has ended. It therefore updates state accordingly.
11. CPU 1 is still running the same RCU reader, which notices this
update and thus complains about the too-short grace period.
The fix is for the get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function to use
rcu_state.gp_seq instead of the root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field.
With this change in place, if step 5's cookie indicates that the grace
period has not yet started, then any prior code executed by CPU 2 must
have happened before CPU 1 came online. This will in turn prevent CPU
1's code in steps 3 and 11 from spanning CPU 2's grace-period wait,
thus preventing CPU 1 from being subjected to a too-short grace period.
This commit therefore makes this change. Note that there is no change to
the poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function, which as noted above,
must continue to use the root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field.
This is of course an asymmetry between these two functions, but is an
asymmetry that is absolutely required for correct operation. It is a
common human tendency to greatly value symmetry, and sometimes symmetry
is a wonderful thing. Other times, symmetry results in poor performance.
But in this case, symmetry is just plain wrong.
Nevertheless, the asymmetry does require an additional adjustment.
It is possible for get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() to see a given
grace period as having started, but for an immediately following
poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() to see it as having not yet started.
Given the current rcu_seq_done_exact() implementation, this will
result in a false-positive indication that the grace period is done
from poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full(). This is dealt with by making
rcu_seq_done_exact() reach back three grace periods rather than just
two of them.
However, simply changing get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function to
use rcu_state.gp_seq instead of the root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq
field results in a theoretical bug in kernels booted with
rcutree.rcu_normal_wake_from_gp=1 due to the following sequence of
events:
o The rcu_gp_init() function invokes rcu_seq_start() to officially
start a new grace period.
o A new RCU reader begins, referencing X from some RCU-protected
list. The new grace period is not obligated to wait for this
reader.
o An updater removes X, then calls synchronize_rcu(), which queues
a wait element.
o The grace period ends, awakening the updater, which frees X
while the reader is still referencing it.
The reason that this is theoretical is that although the grace period
has officially started, none of the CPUs are officially aware of this,
and thus will have to assume that the RCU reader pre-dated the start of
the grace period. Detailed explanation can be found at [2] and [3].
Except for kernels built with CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y, which use the polled
grace-period APIs, which can and do complain bitterly when this sequence
of events occurs. Not only that, there might be some future RCU
grace-period mechanism that pulls this sequence of events from theory
into practice. This commit therefore also pulls the call to
rcu_sr_normal_gp_init() to precede that to rcu_seq_start().
Although this fixes commit 91a967fd6934 ("rcu: Add full-sized polling
for get_completed*() and poll_state*()"), it is not clear that it is
worth backporting this commit. First, it took me many weeks to convince
rcutorture to reproduce this more frequently than once per year.
Second, this cannot be reproduced at all without frequent CPU-hotplug
operations, as in waiting all of 50 milliseconds from the end of the
previous operation until starting the next one. Third, the TREE03.boot
settings cause multi-millisecond delays during RCU grace-period
initialization, which greatly increase the probability of the above
sequence of events. (Don't do this in production workloads!) Fourth,
the TREE03 rcutorture scenario was modified to use four-CPU guest OSes,
to have a single-rcu_node combining tree, no testing of RCU priority
boosting, and no random preemption, and these modifications were
necessary to reproduce this issue in a reasonable timeframe. Fifth,
extremely heavy use of get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() and/or
poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() is required to reproduce this, and as
of v6.12, only kfree_rcu() uses it, and even then not particularly
heavily.
[boqun: Apply the fix [1], and add the comment before the moved
rcu_sr_normal_gp_init(). Additional links are added for explanation.]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Tested-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rcu/d90bd6d9-d15c-4b9b-8a69-95336e74e8f4@paulmck-laptop/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rcu/20250303001507.GA3994772@joelnvbox/ [2]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rcu/Z8bcUsZ9IpRi1QoP@pc636/ [3]
Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>