linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Thread Migration Preemption

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 15 Jul 2007 00:42:01 +0400
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Thread Migration Preemption - v4

On 07/14, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov (oleg@...sign.ru) wrote:
> > On 07/14, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > >
> > > @@ -4891,10 +4948,42 @@ static int migration_thread(void *data)
> > >  		list_del_init(head->next);
> > >  
> > >  		spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
> > > -		__migrate_task(req->task, cpu, req->dest_cpu);
> > > +		migrated = __migrate_task(req->task, cpu, req->dest_cpu);
> > >  		local_irq_enable();
> > > -
> > > -		complete(&req->done);
> > > +		if (!migrated) {
> > > +			/*
> > > +			 * If the process has not been migrated, let it run
> > > +			 * until it reaches a migration_check() so it can
> > > +			 * wake us up.
> > > +			 */
> > > +			spin_lock_irq(&rq->lock);
> > > +			head = &rq->migration_queue;
> > > +			list_add(&req->list, head);
> > > +			if (req->task->se.on_rq
> > > +					|| !task_migrate_count(req->task)) {
> > > +				/*
> > > +				 * The process is on the runqueue, it could
> > > +				 * exit its critical section at any moment,
> > > +				 * don't race with it and retry actively.
> > > +				 * Also, if the thread is not on the runqueue
> > > +				 * and has a zero migration count
> > > +				 * (__migrate_task failed because cpus allowed
> > > +				 * changed), just retry.
> > > +				 */
> > > +				spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock);
> > > +				continue;
> > 
> > Again, this can deadlock. migration_thread() is SCHED_FIFO, and it shares the
> > same CPU with req->task. We are doing a busy-wait loop, req->task may have no
> > chance to finish its critical section.
> > 
> 
> If we share the CPU with the other thread, it means that it won't be on
> the runqueue while we are holding the rq lock.

Why? The req->task could be runnable, but preempted by migration_thread().
In that case req->task->se.on_rq should be true.

I didn't read the new scheduler yet, but I belive on_rq == 0 only when
the task sleeps, it is like the current ->array = NULL. Please correct
me if I am wrong.

Oleg.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/