linux-kernel - Re: Intermittent early panic in try_to_wake

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

Date:	Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:49:40 -0400
From:	Kevin Winchester <kjwinchester@...il.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Intermittent early panic in try_to_wake_up

Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> 
> 
> I may have found the bad thing that could have happened to ksoftirqd.
> 
> If you feel like testing, try the below.  We were altering the task
> struct outside of locks, which is not interrupt etc safe.  It cures a
> problem I ran into, and will hopefully cure yours as well.
> 
> 
> sched: fix runqueue locking buglet.
> 
> Calling set_task_cpu() with the runqueue unlocked is unsafe.  Add cpu_rq_lock()
> locking primitive, and lock the runqueue.  Also, update rq->clock before calling
> set_task_cpu(), as it could be stale.
> 
> Running netperf UDP_STREAM with two pinned tasks with tip 1b9508f applied emitted
> the thoroughly unbelievable result that ratelimiting newidle could produce twice
> the throughput of the virgin kernel.  Reverting to locking the runqueue prior to
> runqueue selection restored benchmarking sanity, as did this patchlet.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> LKML-Reference: <new-submission>

The patch below does not apply to mainline, unless I'm doing something wrong.
It's against -tip, I assume?  Is it just as applicable to mainline?

> 
> ---
>  kernel/sched.c |   32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6.32.git/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.32.git.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6.32.git/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -1011,6 +1011,24 @@ static struct rq *this_rq_lock(void)
>  	return rq;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * cpu_rq_lock - lock the runqueue a given cpu and disable interrupts.
> + */
> +static struct rq *cpu_rq_lock(int cpu, unsigned long *flags)
> +	__acquires(rq->lock)
> +{
> +	struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&rq->lock, *flags);
> +	return rq;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void cpu_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq, unsigned long *flags)
> +	__releases(rq->lock)
> +{
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rq->lock, *flags);
> +}
> +
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_HRTICK
>  /*
>   * Use HR-timers to deliver accurate preemption points.
> @@ -2342,16 +2360,17 @@ static int try_to_wake_up(struct task_st
>  	if (task_contributes_to_load(p))
>  		rq->nr_uninterruptible--;
>  	p->state = TASK_WAKING;
> +	preempt_disable();
>  	task_rq_unlock(rq, &flags);
>  
>  	cpu = p->sched_class->select_task_rq(p, SD_BALANCE_WAKE, wake_flags);
> -	if (cpu != orig_cpu)
> -		set_task_cpu(p, cpu);
> -
> -	rq = task_rq_lock(p, &flags);
> -
> -	if (rq != orig_rq)
> +	if (cpu != orig_cpu) {
> +		rq = cpu_rq_lock(cpu, &flags);
>  		update_rq_clock(rq);
> +		set_task_cpu(p, cpu);
> +	} else
> +		rq = task_rq_lock(p, &flags);
> +	preempt_enable_no_resched();
>  
>  	if (rq->idle_stamp) {
>  		u64 delta = rq->clock - rq->idle_stamp;
> @@ -2365,7 +2384,6 @@ static int try_to_wake_up(struct task_st
>  	}
>  
>  	WARN_ON(p->state != TASK_WAKING);
> -	cpu = task_cpu(p);
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS
>  	schedstat_inc(rq, ttwu_count);
> 
> 
> 

--
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/