[patch 4/5] mm: memcg: synchronize objcg lists with a dedicated spinlock - Linux-stable-mirror

12 Feb 2022

From: Roman Gushchin guro@fb.com
Subject: mm: memcg: synchronize objcg lists with a dedicated spinlock
Alexander reported a circular lock dependency revealed by the mmap1 ltp
test:
LOCKDEP_CIRCULAR (suite: ltp, case: mtest06 (mmap1))
          WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
          5.17.0-20220113.rc0.git0.f2211f194038.300.fc35.s390x+debug #1 Not tainted
          ------------------------------------------------------
          mmap1/202299 is trying to acquire lock:
          00000001892c0188 (css_set_lock){..-.}-{2:2}, at: obj_cgroup_release+0x4a/0xe0
          but task is already holding lock:
          00000000ca3b3818 (&sighand->siglock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: force_sig_info_to_task+0x38/0x180
          which lock already depends on the new lock.
          the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
          -> #1 (&sighand->siglock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
                 __lock_acquire+0x604/0xbd8
                 lock_acquire.part.0+0xe2/0x238
                 lock_acquire+0xb0/0x200
                 _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x6a/0xd8
                 __lock_task_sighand+0x90/0x190
                 cgroup_freeze_task+0x2e/0x90
                 cgroup_migrate_execute+0x11c/0x608
                 cgroup_update_dfl_csses+0x246/0x270
                 cgroup_subtree_control_write+0x238/0x518
                 kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x13e/0x1e0
                 new_sync_write+0x100/0x190
                 vfs_write+0x22c/0x2d8
                 ksys_write+0x6c/0xf8
                 __do_syscall+0x1da/0x208
                 system_call+0x82/0xb0
          -> #0 (css_set_lock){..-.}-{2:2}:
                 check_prev_add+0xe0/0xed8
                 validate_chain+0x736/0xb20
                 __lock_acquire+0x604/0xbd8
                 lock_acquire.part.0+0xe2/0x238
                 lock_acquire+0xb0/0x200
                 _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x6a/0xd8
                 obj_cgroup_release+0x4a/0xe0
                 percpu_ref_put_many.constprop.0+0x150/0x168
                 drain_obj_stock+0x94/0xe8
                 refill_obj_stock+0x94/0x278
                 obj_cgroup_charge+0x164/0x1d8
                 kmem_cache_alloc+0xac/0x528
                 __sigqueue_alloc+0x150/0x308
                 __send_signal+0x260/0x550
                 send_signal+0x7e/0x348
                 force_sig_info_to_task+0x104/0x180
                 force_sig_fault+0x48/0x58
                 __do_pgm_check+0x120/0x1f0
                 pgm_check_handler+0x11e/0x180
          other info that might help us debug this:
           Possible unsafe locking scenario:
                 CPU0                    CPU1
                 ----                    ----
            lock(&sighand->siglock);
                                         lock(css_set_lock);
                                         lock(&sighand->siglock);
            lock(css_set_lock);
           *** DEADLOCK ***
          2 locks held by mmap1/202299:
           #0: 00000000ca3b3818 (&sighand->siglock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: force_sig_info_to_task+0x38/0x180
           #1: 00000001892ad560 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: percpu_ref_put_many.constprop.0+0x0/0x168
          stack backtrace:
          CPU: 15 PID: 202299 Comm: mmap1 Not tainted 5.17.0-20220113.rc0.git0.f2211f194038.300.fc35.s390x+debug #1
          Hardware name: IBM 3906 M04 704 (LPAR)
          Call Trace:
           [<00000001888aacfe>] dump_stack_lvl+0x76/0x98
           [<0000000187c6d7be>] check_noncircular+0x136/0x158
           [<0000000187c6e888>] check_prev_add+0xe0/0xed8
           [<0000000187c6fdb6>] validate_chain+0x736/0xb20
           [<0000000187c71e54>] __lock_acquire+0x604/0xbd8
           [<0000000187c7301a>] lock_acquire.part.0+0xe2/0x238
           [<0000000187c73220>] lock_acquire+0xb0/0x200
           [<00000001888bf9aa>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x6a/0xd8
           [<0000000187ef6862>] obj_cgroup_release+0x4a/0xe0
           [<0000000187ef6498>] percpu_ref_put_many.constprop.0+0x150/0x168
           [<0000000187ef9674>] drain_obj_stock+0x94/0xe8
           [<0000000187efa464>] refill_obj_stock+0x94/0x278
           [<0000000187eff55c>] obj_cgroup_charge+0x164/0x1d8
           [<0000000187ed8aa4>] kmem_cache_alloc+0xac/0x528
           [<0000000187bf2eb8>] __sigqueue_alloc+0x150/0x308
           [<0000000187bf4210>] __send_signal+0x260/0x550
           [<0000000187bf5f06>] send_signal+0x7e/0x348
           [<0000000187bf7274>] force_sig_info_to_task+0x104/0x180
           [<0000000187bf7758>] force_sig_fault+0x48/0x58
           [<00000001888ae160>] __do_pgm_check+0x120/0x1f0
           [<00000001888c0cde>] pgm_check_handler+0x11e/0x180
          INFO: lockdep is turned off.
In this example a slab allocation from __send_signal() caused a refilling
and draining of a percpu objcg stock, resulted in a releasing of another
non-related objcg.  Objcg release path requires taking the css_set_lock,
which is used to synchronize objcg lists.
This can create a circular dependency with the sighandler lock, which is
taken with the locked css_set_lock by the freezer code (to freeze a task).
In general it seems that using css_set_lock to synchronize objcg lists
makes any slab allocations and deallocation with the locked css_set_lock
and any intervened locks risky.
To fix the problem and make the code more robust let's stop using
css_set_lock to synchronize objcg lists and use a new dedicated spinlock
instead.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/Yfm1IHmoGdyUR81T@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com
Fixes: bf4f059954dc ("mm: memcg/slab: obj_cgroup API")
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin guro@fb.com
Reported-by: Alexander Egorenkov egorenar@linux.ibm.com
Tested-by: Alexander Egorenkov egorenar@linux.ibm.com
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long longman@redhat.com
Acked-by: Tejun Heo tj@kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt shakeelb@google.com
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Linton jeremy.linton@arm.com
Tested-by: Jeremy Linton jeremy.linton@arm.com
Cc: Johannes Weiner hannes@cmpxchg.org
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton akpm@linux-foundation.org
---

--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h~mm-memcg-synchronize-objcg-lists-with-a-dedicated-spinlock
+++ a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ struct obj_cgroup {
    struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
    atomic_t nr_charged_bytes;
    union {
-		struct list_head list;
+		struct list_head list; /* protected by objcg_lock */
    	struct rcu_head rcu;
    };
 };
@@ -315,7 +315,8 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
 #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
    int kmemcg_id;
    struct obj_cgroup __rcu *objcg;
-	struct list_head objcg_list; /* list of inherited objcgs */
+	/* list of inherited objcgs, protected by objcg_lock */
+	struct list_head objcg_list;
 #endif
MEMCG_PADDING(_pad2_);
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c~mm-memcg-synchronize-objcg-lists-with-a-dedicated-spinlock
+++ a/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ struct mem_cgroup *vmpressure_to_memcg(s
 }
#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
-extern spinlock_t css_set_lock;
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(objcg_lock);
bool mem_cgroup_kmem_disabled(void)
 {
@@ -298,9 +298,9 @@ static void obj_cgroup_release(struct pe
    if (nr_pages)
    	obj_cgroup_uncharge_pages(objcg, nr_pages);
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&css_set_lock, flags);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&objcg_lock, flags);
    list_del(&objcg->list);
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&css_set_lock, flags);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&objcg_lock, flags);
percpu_ref_exit(ref);
    kfree_rcu(objcg, rcu);
@@ -332,7 +332,7 @@ static void memcg_reparent_objcgs(struct
objcg = rcu_replace_pointer(memcg->objcg, NULL, true);
-	spin_lock_irq(&css_set_lock);
+	spin_lock_irq(&objcg_lock);
/* 1) Ready to reparent active objcg. */
    list_add(&objcg->list, &memcg->objcg_list);
@@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ static void memcg_reparent_objcgs(struct
    /* 3) Move already reparented objcgs to the parent's list */
    list_splice(&memcg->objcg_list, &parent->objcg_list);
-	spin_unlock_irq(&css_set_lock);
+	spin_unlock_irq(&objcg_lock);
percpu_ref_kill(&objcg->refcnt);
 }
_

    