tree 982c7f07bf2315fcf9b7d14eef1640c748ffb025
parent d487d57581057abd271651334ea2996aa1b31e28
author Jane Li <jiel@marvell.com> 1396561725 -0700
committer Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 1396567268 -0700

printk: fix one circular lockdep warning about console_lock

Fix a warning about possible circular locking dependency.

If do in following sequence:

    enter suspend ->  resume ->  plug-out CPUx (echo 0 > cpux/online)

lockdep will show warning as following:

  ======================================================
  [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
  3.10.0 #2 Tainted: G           O
  -------------------------------------------------------
  sh/1271 is trying to acquire lock:
  (console_lock){+.+.+.}, at: console_cpu_notify+0x20/0x2c
  but task is already holding lock:
  (cpu_hotplug.lock){+.+.+.}, at: cpu_hotplug_begin+0x2c/0x58
  which lock already depends on the new lock.

  the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
  -> #2 (cpu_hotplug.lock){+.+.+.}:
    lock_acquire+0x98/0x12c
    mutex_lock_nested+0x50/0x3d8
    cpu_hotplug_begin+0x2c/0x58
    _cpu_up+0x24/0x154
    cpu_up+0x64/0x84
    smp_init+0x9c/0xd4
    kernel_init_freeable+0x78/0x1c8
    kernel_init+0x8/0xe4
    ret_from_fork+0x14/0x2c

  -> #1 (cpu_add_remove_lock){+.+.+.}:
    lock_acquire+0x98/0x12c
    mutex_lock_nested+0x50/0x3d8
    disable_nonboot_cpus+0x8/0xe8
    suspend_devices_and_enter+0x214/0x448
    pm_suspend+0x1e4/0x284
    try_to_suspend+0xa4/0xbc
    process_one_work+0x1c4/0x4fc
    worker_thread+0x138/0x37c
    kthread+0xa4/0xb0
    ret_from_fork+0x14/0x2c

  -> #0 (console_lock){+.+.+.}:
    __lock_acquire+0x1b38/0x1b80
    lock_acquire+0x98/0x12c
    console_lock+0x54/0x68
    console_cpu_notify+0x20/0x2c
    notifier_call_chain+0x44/0x84
    __cpu_notify+0x2c/0x48
    cpu_notify_nofail+0x8/0x14
    _cpu_down+0xf4/0x258
    cpu_down+0x24/0x40
    store_online+0x30/0x74
    dev_attr_store+0x18/0x24
    sysfs_write_file+0x16c/0x19c
    vfs_write+0xb4/0x190
    SyS_write+0x3c/0x70
    ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x48

  Chain exists of:
     console_lock --> cpu_add_remove_lock --> cpu_hotplug.lock

  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
         CPU0                    CPU1
         ----                    ----
  lock(cpu_hotplug.lock);
                                 lock(cpu_add_remove_lock);
                                 lock(cpu_hotplug.lock);
  lock(console_lock);
    *** DEADLOCK ***

There are three locks involved in two sequence:
a) pm suspend:
	console_lock (@suspend_console())
	cpu_add_remove_lock (@disable_nonboot_cpus())
	cpu_hotplug.lock (@_cpu_down())
b) Plug-out CPUx:
	cpu_add_remove_lock (@(cpu_down())
	cpu_hotplug.lock (@_cpu_down())
	console_lock (@console_cpu_notify()) => Lockdeps prints warning log.

There should be not real deadlock, as flag of console_suspended can
protect this.

Although console_suspend() releases console_sem, it doesn't tell lockdep
about it.  That results in the lockdep warning about circular locking
when doing the following: enter suspend -> resume -> plug-out CPUx (echo
0 > cpux/online)

Fix the problem by telling lockdep we actually released the semaphore in
console_suspend() and acquired it again in console_resume().

Signed-off-by: Jane Li <jiel@marvell.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>