Add two self test cases for the following case:

        P0:                     P1:                     P2:

                                <in irq handler>
        spin_lock_irq(&slock)   read_lock(&rwlock)
                                                        write_lock_irq(&rwlock)
        read_lock(&rwlock)      spin_lock(&slock)

, which is a deadlock, as the read_lock() on P0 cannot get the lock
because of the fairness.

        P0:                     P1:                     P2:

        <in irq handler>
        spin_lock(&slock)       read_lock(&rwlock)
                                                        write_lock(&rwlock)
        read_lock(&rwlock)      spin_lock_irq(&slock)

, which is not a deadlock, as the read_lock() on P0 can get the lock
because it could use the unfair fastpass.

Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.f...@gmail.com>
---
 lib/locking-selftest.c | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 104 insertions(+)

diff --git a/lib/locking-selftest.c b/lib/locking-selftest.c
index 4264cf4b60bb..17f8f6f37165 100644
--- a/lib/locking-selftest.c
+++ b/lib/locking-selftest.c
@@ -2201,6 +2201,108 @@ static void ww_tests(void)
        pr_cont("\n");
 }
 
+
+/*
+ * <in hardirq handler>
+ * read_lock(&A);
+ *                     <hardirq disable>
+ *                     spin_lock(&B);
+ * spin_lock(&B);
+ *                     read_lock(&A);
+ *
+ * is a deadlock.
+ */
+static void queued_read_lock_hardirq_RE_Er(void)
+{
+       HARDIRQ_ENTER();
+       read_lock(&rwlock_A);
+       LOCK(B);
+       UNLOCK(B);
+       read_unlock(&rwlock_A);
+       HARDIRQ_EXIT();
+
+       HARDIRQ_DISABLE();
+       LOCK(B);
+       read_lock(&rwlock_A);
+       read_unlock(&rwlock_A);
+       UNLOCK(B);
+       HARDIRQ_ENABLE();
+}
+
+/*
+ * <in hardirq handler>
+ * spin_lock(&B);
+ *                     <hardirq disable>
+ *                     read_lock(&A);
+ * read_lock(&A);
+ *                     spin_lock(&B);
+ *
+ * is not a deadlock.
+ */
+static void queued_read_lock_hardirq_ER_rE(void)
+{
+       HARDIRQ_ENTER();
+       LOCK(B);
+       read_lock(&rwlock_A);
+       read_unlock(&rwlock_A);
+       UNLOCK(B);
+       HARDIRQ_EXIT();
+
+       HARDIRQ_DISABLE();
+       read_lock(&rwlock_A);
+       LOCK(B);
+       UNLOCK(B);
+       read_unlock(&rwlock_A);
+       HARDIRQ_ENABLE();
+}
+
+/*
+ * <hardirq disable>
+ * spin_lock(&B);
+ *                     read_lock(&A);
+ *                     <in hardirq handler>
+ *                     spin_lock(&B);
+ * read_lock(&A);
+ *
+ * is a deadlock. Because the two read_lock()s are both non-recursive readers.
+ */
+static void queued_read_lock_hardirq_inversion(void)
+{
+
+       HARDIRQ_ENTER();
+       LOCK(B);
+       UNLOCK(B);
+       HARDIRQ_EXIT();
+
+       HARDIRQ_DISABLE();
+       LOCK(B);
+       read_lock(&rwlock_A);
+       read_unlock(&rwlock_A);
+       UNLOCK(B);
+       HARDIRQ_ENABLE();
+
+       read_lock(&rwlock_A);
+       read_unlock(&rwlock_A);
+}
+
+static void queued_read_lock_tests(void)
+{
+       printk("  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------\n");
+       printk("  | queued read lock tests |\n");
+       printk("  ---------------------------\n");
+       print_testname("hardirq read-lock/lock-read");
+       dotest(queued_read_lock_hardirq_RE_Er, FAILURE, LOCKTYPE_RWLOCK);
+       pr_cont("\n");
+
+       print_testname("hardirq lock-read/read-lock");
+       dotest(queued_read_lock_hardirq_ER_rE, SUCCESS, LOCKTYPE_RWLOCK);
+       pr_cont("\n");
+
+       print_testname("hardirq inversion");
+       dotest(queued_read_lock_hardirq_inversion, FAILURE, LOCKTYPE_RWLOCK);
+       pr_cont("\n");
+}
+
 void locking_selftest(void)
 {
        /*
@@ -2318,6 +2420,8 @@ void locking_selftest(void)
        /*
         * queued_read_lock() specific test cases can be put here
         */
+       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_QUEUED_RWLOCKS))
+               queued_read_lock_tests();
 
        if (unexpected_testcase_failures) {
                
printk("-----------------------------------------------------------------\n");
-- 
2.28.0

Reply via email to