| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:11:36 -0600
From: Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>
To: gregkh@...e.de
Cc: kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] sysfs: don't use global workqueue in
sysfs_schedule_callback()
A sysfs attribute using sysfs_schedule_callback() to commit suicide
may end up calling device_unregister(), which will eventually call
a driver's ->remove function.
Drivers may call flush_scheduled_work() in their shutdown routines,
in which case lockdep will complain with something like the following:
=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
2.6.29-rc8-kk #1
---------------------------------------------
events/4/56 is trying to acquire lock:
(events){--..}, at: [<ffffffff80257fc0>] flush_workqueue+0x0/0xa0
but task is already holding lock:
(events){--..}, at: [<ffffffff80257648>] run_workqueue+0x108/0x230
other info that might help us debug this:
3 locks held by events/4/56:
#0: (events){--..}, at: [<ffffffff80257648>] run_workqueue+0x108/0x230
#1: (&ss->work){--..}, at: [<ffffffff80257648>] run_workqueue+0x108/0x230
#2: (pci_remove_rescan_mutex){--..}, at: [<ffffffff803c10d1>] remove_callback+0x21/0x40
stack backtrace:
Pid: 56, comm: events/4 Not tainted 2.6.29-rc8-kk #1
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff8026dfcd>] validate_chain+0xb7d/0x1260
[<ffffffff8026eade>] __lock_acquire+0x42e/0xa40
[<ffffffff8026f148>] lock_acquire+0x58/0x80
[<ffffffff80257fc0>] ? flush_workqueue+0x0/0xa0
[<ffffffff8025800d>] flush_workqueue+0x4d/0xa0
[<ffffffff80257fc0>] ? flush_workqueue+0x0/0xa0
[<ffffffff80258070>] flush_scheduled_work+0x10/0x20
[<ffffffffa0144065>] e1000_remove+0x55/0xfe [e1000e]
[<ffffffff8033ee30>] ? sysfs_schedule_callback_work+0x0/0x50
[<ffffffff803bfeb2>] pci_device_remove+0x32/0x70
[<ffffffff80441da9>] __device_release_driver+0x59/0x90
[<ffffffff80441edb>] device_release_driver+0x2b/0x40
[<ffffffff804419d6>] bus_remove_device+0xa6/0x120
[<ffffffff8043e46b>] device_del+0x12b/0x190
[<ffffffff8043e4f6>] device_unregister+0x26/0x70
[<ffffffff803ba969>] pci_stop_dev+0x49/0x60
[<ffffffff803baab0>] pci_remove_bus_device+0x40/0xc0
[<ffffffff803c10d9>] remove_callback+0x29/0x40
[<ffffffff8033ee4f>] sysfs_schedule_callback_work+0x1f/0x50
[<ffffffff8025769a>] run_workqueue+0x15a/0x230
[<ffffffff80257648>] ? run_workqueue+0x108/0x230
[<ffffffff8025846f>] worker_thread+0x9f/0x100
[<ffffffff8025bce0>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
[<ffffffff802583d0>] ? worker_thread+0x0/0x100
[<ffffffff8025b89d>] kthread+0x4d/0x80
[<ffffffff8020d4ba>] child_rip+0xa/0x20
[<ffffffff8020cebc>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30
[<ffffffff8025b850>] ? kthread+0x0/0x80
[<ffffffff8020d4b0>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x20
Although we know that the device_unregister path will never acquire
a lock that a driver might try to acquire in its ->remove, in general
we should never attempt to flush a workqueue from within the same
workqueue, and lockdep rightly complains.
So as long as sysfs attributes cannot commit suicide directly and we
are stuck with this callback mechanism, put the sysfs callbacks on
their own workqueue instead of the global one.
This has the side benefit that if a suicidal sysfs attribute kicks
off a long chain of ->remove callbacks, we no longer induce a long
delay on the global queue.
Reported-by: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>
Tested-by: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>
---
This also fixes a missing module_put in the error path introduced
by sysfs-only-allow-one-scheduled-removal-callback-per-kobj.patch.
We never destroy the workqueue, but I'm not sure that's a
problem.
---
file.c | 12 +++++++++++-
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
---
diff --git a/fs/sysfs/file.c b/fs/sysfs/file.c
index 289c43a..979e937 100644
--- a/fs/sysfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/sysfs/file.c
@@ -667,6 +667,7 @@ struct sysfs_schedule_callback_struct {
struct work_struct work;
};
+static struct workqueue_struct *sysfs_workqueue;
static DEFINE_MUTEX(sysfs_workq_mutex);
static LIST_HEAD(sysfs_workq);
static void sysfs_schedule_callback_work(struct work_struct *work)
@@ -715,11 +716,20 @@ int sysfs_schedule_callback(struct kobject *kobj, void (*func)(void *),
mutex_lock(&sysfs_workq_mutex);
list_for_each_entry_safe(ss, tmp, &sysfs_workq, workq_list)
if (ss->kobj == kobj) {
+ module_put(owner);
mutex_unlock(&sysfs_workq_mutex);
return -EAGAIN;
}
mutex_unlock(&sysfs_workq_mutex);
+ if (sysfs_workqueue == NULL) {
+ sysfs_workqueue = create_workqueue("sysfsd");
+ if (sysfs_workqueue == NULL) {
+ module_put(owner);
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ }
+
ss = kmalloc(sizeof(*ss), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!ss) {
module_put(owner);
@@ -735,7 +745,7 @@ int sysfs_schedule_callback(struct kobject *kobj, void (*func)(void *),
mutex_lock(&sysfs_workq_mutex);
list_add_tail(&ss->workq_list, &sysfs_workq);
mutex_unlock(&sysfs_workq_mutex);
- schedule_work(&ss->work);
+ queue_work(sysfs_workqueue, &ss->work);
return 0;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sysfs_schedule_callback);
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists