Hi, when enabling CONFIG_WW_MUTEX_SELFTEST on arm64 or x86_64, I get the following traceback.
[ 3.111852] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 3.112100] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(__owner_task(owner) != current) [ 3.112753] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 771 at kernel/locking/mutex.c:1211 __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x1a8/0x2e0 [ 3.113238] Modules linked in: [ 3.113774] CPU: 1 PID: 771 Comm: kworker/u16:8 Not tainted 4.19.0-rc5-dirty #1 [ 3.114025] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) [ 3.114587] Workqueue: test-ww_mutex test_cycle_work [ 3.114950] pstate: 40000005 (nZcv daif -PAN -UAO) [ 3.115144] pc : __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x1a8/0x2e0 [ 3.115327] lr : __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x1a8/0x2e0 [ 3.115500] sp : ffff00000b7cbc40 [ 3.115647] x29: ffff00000b7cbc40 x28: 0000000000000000 [ 3.115921] x27: ffff00000942f000 x26: ffff00000a204da0 [ 3.116155] x25: ffff00000a1c93d0 x24: ffff000009103cd8 [ 3.116376] x23: ffff00000a1c9000 x22: ffff00000942f000 [ 3.116596] x21: ffff00000b7cbca8 x20: ffff80001c05f8c8 [ 3.116817] x19: 0000000000000000 x18: ffffffffffffffff [ 3.117036] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 [ 3.117256] x15: ffff00000942f808 x14: ffff00008a1c8bb7 [ 3.117476] x13: ffff00000a1c8bc5 x12: ffff00000944f000 [ 3.117695] x11: 0000000005f5e0ff x10: ffff0000094b3000 [ 3.117947] x9 : 0000000000000000 x8 : ffff00000942f808 [ 3.118172] x7 : ffff00000816153c x6 : 0000000000000000 [ 3.118392] x5 : 0000000000000000 x4 : ffff00000b7cc000 [ 3.118612] x3 : 6172e063a21fe200 x2 : ffff00000944fd80 [ 3.118830] x1 : 6172e063a21fe200 x0 : 0000000000000000 [ 3.119169] Call trace: [ 3.119348] __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x1a8/0x2e0 [ 3.119540] ww_mutex_unlock+0x48/0xa0 [ 3.119709] test_cycle_work+0x10c/0x220 [ 3.119864] process_one_work+0x29c/0x708 [ 3.120016] worker_thread+0x40/0x458 [ 3.120179] kthread+0x12c/0x130 [ 3.120317] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18 Debugging shows that the traceback occurs in the following code in test_cycle_work(). + err = ww_mutex_lock(cycle->b_mutex, &ctx); + if (err == -EDEADLK) { # true + ww_mutex_unlock(&cycle->a_mutex); + ww_mutex_lock_slow(cycle->b_mutex, &ctx); + err = ww_mutex_lock(&cycle->a_mutex, &ctx); # returns with err == -EDEADLK + } + + if (!err) + ww_mutex_unlock(cycle->b_mutex); + ww_mutex_unlock(&cycle->a_mutex); # traceback seen here: # unlocks a_mutex even though it was not # acquired by this thread The problem is quite easy to reproduce with the following qemu command. qemu-system-aarch64 -M virt -cpu cortex-a57 -nographic -monitor none \ -kernel arch/arm64/boot/Image -no-reboot -smp 8 -m 512 -device virtio-blk-pci,drive=d0 \ -drive file=rootfs.ext2,if=none,id=d0,format=raw \ -append 'console=ttyAMA0 root=/dev/vda rw' or: qemu-system-x86_64 \ -kernel arch/x86/boot/bzImage \ -M q35 \ -cpu Skylake-Server \ -no-reboot -smp 8 -m 1G \ -usb -device usb-storage,drive=d0 \ -drive file=rootfs.ext2,if=none,id=d0,format=raw \ --append 'root=/dev/sda rw rootwait console=ttyS0 console=tty' \ -nographic Details don't really matter as long as the number of CPUs is at least 8 (I have not seen the problem with 1, 2, 4, or 6 CPUs). My test system has 8 CPU cores (times 2 for hyperthreading), so that may be related. The test case above is clearly wrong if both calls to ww_mutex_lock() fail with -EDEADLK. Unfortunately I don't know the expected behavior in this case, so I'll have to pass this on without a proposed fix. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help fixing the problem. Thanks, Guenter