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, 26 Jul 2013 01:21:18 +0000
From:	"Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
CC:	"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>,
	"Zhao, Yakui" <yakui.zhao@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 07/13] ACPI/IPMI: Add reference counting for ACPI IPMI
 transfers

> From: linux-acpi-owner@...r.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-acpi-owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki
> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 6:23 AM
> 
> On Tuesday, July 23, 2013 04:09:54 PM Lv Zheng wrote:
> > This patch adds reference counting for ACPI IPMI transfers to tune the
> > locking granularity of tx_msg_lock.
> >
> > The acpi_ipmi_msg handling is re-designed using referece counting.
> > 1. tx_msg is always unlinked before complete(), so that:
> >    1.1. it is safe to put complete() out side of tx_msg_lock;
> >    1.2. complete() can only happen once, thus smp_wmb() is not required.
> > 2. Increasing the reference of tx_msg before calling
> >    ipmi_request_settime() and introducing tx_msg_lock protected
> >    ipmi_cancel_tx_msg() so that a complete() can happen in parellel with
> >    tx_msg unlinking in the failure cases.
> > 3. tx_msg holds the reference of acpi_ipmi_device so that it can be flushed
> >    and freed in the contexts other than acpi_ipmi_space_handler().
> >
> > The lockdep_chains shows all acpi_ipmi locks are leaf locks after the
> > tuning:
> > 1. ipmi_lock is always leaf:
> >    irq_context: 0
> >    [ffffffff81a943f8] smi_watchers_mutex
> >    [ffffffffa06eca60] driver_data.ipmi_lock
> >    irq_context: 0
> >    [ffffffff82767b40] &buffer->mutex
> >    [ffffffffa00a6678] s_active#103
> >    [ffffffffa06eca60] driver_data.ipmi_lock
> > 2. without this patch applied, lock used by complete() is held after
> >    holding tx_msg_lock:
> >    irq_context: 0
> >    [ffffffff82767b40] &buffer->mutex
> >    [ffffffffa00a6678] s_active#103
> >    [ffffffffa06ecce8] &(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock)->rlock
> >    irq_context: 1
> >    [ffffffffa06ecce8] &(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock)->rlock
> >    irq_context: 1
> >    [ffffffffa06ecce8] &(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock)->rlock
> >    [ffffffffa06eccf0] &x->wait#25
> >    irq_context: 1
> >    [ffffffffa06ecce8] &(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock)->rlock
> >    [ffffffffa06eccf0] &x->wait#25
> >    [ffffffff81e36620] &p->pi_lock
> >    irq_context: 1
> >    [ffffffffa06ecce8] &(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock)->rlock
> >    [ffffffffa06eccf0] &x->wait#25
> >    [ffffffff81e36620] &p->pi_lock
> >    [ffffffff81e5d0a8] &rq->lock
> > 3. with this patch applied, tx_msg_lock is always leaf:
> >    irq_context: 0
> >    [ffffffff82767b40] &buffer->mutex
> >    [ffffffffa00a66d8] s_active#107
> >    [ffffffffa07ecdc8] &(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock)->rlock
> >    irq_context: 1
> >    [ffffffffa07ecdc8] &(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock)->rlock
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>
> > Cc: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@...el.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c |  107
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >  1 file changed, 77 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
> > index 2a09156..0ee1ea6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
> > @@ -105,6 +105,7 @@ struct acpi_ipmi_msg {
> >  	u8	data[ACPI_IPMI_MAX_MSG_LENGTH];
> >  	u8	rx_len;
> >  	struct acpi_ipmi_device *device;
> > +	atomic_t	refcnt;
> 
> Again: kref, please?

Please see the concerns in another email.

> 
> >  };
> >
> >  /* IPMI request/response buffer per ACPI 4.0, sec 5.5.2.4.3.2 */
> > @@ -195,22 +196,47 @@ static struct acpi_ipmi_device
> *acpi_ipmi_get_selected_smi(void)
> >  	return ipmi_device;
> >  }
> >
> > -static struct acpi_ipmi_msg *acpi_alloc_ipmi_msg(struct acpi_ipmi_device
> *ipmi)
> > +static struct acpi_ipmi_msg *ipmi_msg_alloc(void)
> >  {
> > +	struct acpi_ipmi_device *ipmi;
> >  	struct acpi_ipmi_msg *ipmi_msg;
> > -	struct pnp_dev *pnp_dev = ipmi->pnp_dev;
> >
> > +	ipmi = acpi_ipmi_get_selected_smi();
> > +	if (!ipmi)
> > +		return NULL;
> >  	ipmi_msg = kzalloc(sizeof(struct acpi_ipmi_msg), GFP_KERNEL);
> > -	if (!ipmi_msg)	{
> > -		dev_warn(&pnp_dev->dev, "Can't allocate memory for ipmi_msg\n");
> > +	if (!ipmi_msg) {
> > +		acpi_ipmi_dev_put(ipmi);
> >  		return NULL;
> >  	}
> > +	atomic_set(&ipmi_msg->refcnt, 1);
> >  	init_completion(&ipmi_msg->tx_complete);
> >  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ipmi_msg->head);
> >  	ipmi_msg->device = ipmi;
> > +
> >  	return ipmi_msg;
> >  }
> >
> > +static struct acpi_ipmi_msg *
> > +acpi_ipmi_msg_get(struct acpi_ipmi_msg *tx_msg)
> > +{
> > +	if (tx_msg)
> > +		atomic_inc(&tx_msg->refcnt);
> > +	return tx_msg;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void ipmi_msg_release(struct acpi_ipmi_msg *tx_msg)
> > +{
> > +	acpi_ipmi_dev_put(tx_msg->device);
> > +	kfree(tx_msg);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void acpi_ipmi_msg_put(struct acpi_ipmi_msg *tx_msg)
> > +{
> > +	if (tx_msg && atomic_dec_and_test(&tx_msg->refcnt))
> > +		ipmi_msg_release(tx_msg);
> > +}
> > +
> >  #define		IPMI_OP_RGN_NETFN(offset)	((offset >> 8) & 0xff)
> >  #define		IPMI_OP_RGN_CMD(offset)		(offset & 0xff)
> >  static int acpi_format_ipmi_request(struct acpi_ipmi_msg *tx_msg,
> > @@ -300,7 +326,7 @@ static void acpi_format_ipmi_response(struct
> acpi_ipmi_msg *msg,
> >
> >  static void ipmi_flush_tx_msg(struct acpi_ipmi_device *ipmi)
> >  {
> > -	struct acpi_ipmi_msg *tx_msg, *temp;
> > +	struct acpi_ipmi_msg *tx_msg;
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >
> >  	/*
> > @@ -311,16 +337,46 @@ static void ipmi_flush_tx_msg(struct
> acpi_ipmi_device *ipmi)
> >  	 */
> >  	while (atomic_read(&ipmi->refcnt) > 1) {
> >  		spin_lock_irqsave(&ipmi->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > -		list_for_each_entry_safe(tx_msg, temp,
> > -					 &ipmi->tx_msg_list, head) {
> > +		while (!list_empty(&ipmi->tx_msg_list)) {
> > +			tx_msg = list_first_entry(&ipmi->tx_msg_list,
> > +						  struct acpi_ipmi_msg,
> > +						  head);
> > +			list_del(&tx_msg->head);
> > +			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmi->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > +
> >  			/* wake up the sleep thread on the Tx msg */
> >  			complete(&tx_msg->tx_complete);
> > +			acpi_ipmi_msg_put(tx_msg);
> > +			spin_lock_irqsave(&ipmi->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> >  		}
> >  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmi->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > +
> >  		schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(msecs_to_jiffies(1));
> >  	}
> >  }
> >
> > +static void ipmi_cancel_tx_msg(struct acpi_ipmi_device *ipmi,
> > +			       struct acpi_ipmi_msg *msg)
> > +{
> > +	struct acpi_ipmi_msg *tx_msg;
> > +	int msg_found = 0;
> 
> Use bool?

OK.
There are other int flags in the original codes, do I need to do a cleanup for all of them (dev_found)?

> 
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> > +
> > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&ipmi->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > +	list_for_each_entry(tx_msg, &ipmi->tx_msg_list, head) {
> > +		if (msg == tx_msg) {
> > +			msg_found = 1;
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> > +	}
> > +	if (msg_found)
> > +		list_del(&tx_msg->head);
> 
> The list_del() can be done when you set msg_found.

Please see my concerns in another email.

Thanks and best regards
-Lv

> 
> > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmi->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > +
> > +	if (msg_found)
> > +		acpi_ipmi_msg_put(tx_msg);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static void ipmi_msg_handler(struct ipmi_recv_msg *msg, void
> *user_msg_data)
> >  {
> >  	struct acpi_ipmi_device *ipmi_device = user_msg_data;
> > @@ -343,12 +399,15 @@ static void ipmi_msg_handler(struct
> ipmi_recv_msg *msg, void *user_msg_data)
> >  			break;
> >  		}
> >  	}
> > +	if (msg_found)
> > +		list_del(&tx_msg->head);
> > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> >
> >  	if (!msg_found) {
> >  		dev_warn(&pnp_dev->dev,
> >  			 "Unexpected response (msg id %ld) is returned.\n",
> >  			 msg->msgid);
> > -		goto out_lock;
> > +		goto out_msg;
> >  	}
> >
> >  	/* copy the response data to Rx_data buffer */
> > @@ -360,14 +419,11 @@ static void ipmi_msg_handler(struct
> ipmi_recv_msg *msg, void *user_msg_data)
> >  	}
> >  	tx_msg->rx_len = msg->msg.data_len;
> >  	memcpy(tx_msg->data, msg->msg.data, tx_msg->rx_len);
> > -	/* tx_msg content must be valid before setting msg_done flag */
> > -	smp_wmb();
> >  	tx_msg->msg_done = 1;
> >
> >  out_comp:
> >  	complete(&tx_msg->tx_complete);
> > -out_lock:
> > -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > +	acpi_ipmi_msg_put(tx_msg);
> >  out_msg:
> >  	ipmi_free_recv_msg(msg);
> >  }
> > @@ -493,21 +549,17 @@ acpi_ipmi_space_handler(u32 function,
> acpi_physical_address address,
> >  	if ((function & ACPI_IO_MASK) == ACPI_READ)
> >  		return AE_TYPE;
> >
> > -	ipmi_device = acpi_ipmi_get_selected_smi();
> > -	if (!ipmi_device)
> > +	tx_msg = ipmi_msg_alloc();
> > +	if (!tx_msg)
> >  		return AE_NOT_EXIST;
> > -
> > -	tx_msg = acpi_alloc_ipmi_msg(ipmi_device);
> > -	if (!tx_msg) {
> > -		status = AE_NO_MEMORY;
> > -		goto out_ref;
> > -	}
> > +	ipmi_device = tx_msg->device;
> >
> >  	if (acpi_format_ipmi_request(tx_msg, address, value) != 0) {
> > -		status = AE_TYPE;
> > -		goto out_msg;
> > +		ipmi_msg_release(tx_msg);
> > +		return AE_TYPE;
> >  	}
> >
> > +	acpi_ipmi_msg_get(tx_msg);
> >  	spin_lock_irqsave(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> >  	list_add_tail(&tx_msg->head, &ipmi_device->tx_msg_list);
> >  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > @@ -518,21 +570,16 @@ acpi_ipmi_space_handler(u32 function,
> acpi_physical_address address,
> >  				   NULL, 0, 0, 0);
> >  	if (err) {
> >  		status = AE_ERROR;
> > -		goto out_list;
> > +		goto out_msg;
> >  	}
> >  	rem_time = wait_for_completion_timeout(&tx_msg->tx_complete,
> >  					       IPMI_TIMEOUT);
> >  	acpi_format_ipmi_response(tx_msg, value, rem_time);
> >  	status = AE_OK;
> >
> > -out_list:
> > -	spin_lock_irqsave(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> > -	list_del(&tx_msg->head);
> > -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmi_device->tx_msg_lock, flags);
> >  out_msg:
> > -	kfree(tx_msg);
> > -out_ref:
> > -	acpi_ipmi_dev_put(ipmi_device);
> > +	ipmi_cancel_tx_msg(ipmi_device, tx_msg);
> > +	acpi_ipmi_msg_put(tx_msg);
> >  	return status;
> >  }
> >
> >
> --
> I speak only for myself.
> Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ