| 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:28:24 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Nicolai Hähnle <Nicolai.Haehnle@....com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
LKP <lkp@...org>
Subject: Re: [locking/ww_mutex] 2a0c112828 WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 18 at
kernel/locking/mutex.c:305 __ww_mutex_wakeup_for_backoff
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 01:14:09PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This bisect result is not satisfactory, however the bug is very
> reproducible and looks still alive in mainline&linux-next. You may
> try the attached reproduce-* script to debug it.
OK, let me try that, however, see below.
> commit 2a0c11282881875dc44f166a20eedf0d866dd0ef
> Author: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
> AuthorDate: Thu Dec 1 11:47:10 2016 +0000
> Commit: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> CommitDate: Sat Jan 14 11:37:17 2017 +0100
>
> locking/ww_mutex: Add kselftests for ww_mutex stress
>
> [ 1.057727] Freeing initrd memory: 3276K
> [ 1.059257] The force parameter has not been set to 1. The Iris poweroff handler will not be installed.
> [ 1.060266] NatSemi SCx200 Driver
> [ 1.299666] random: fast init done
> [ 1.568992] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 1.569656] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 18 at kernel/locking/mutex.c:305 __ww_mutex_wakeup_for_backoff+0x31/0x7a
> [ 1.571194] CPU: 0 PID: 18 Comm: kworker/0:1 Not tainted 4.10.0-rc3-00155-g2a0c112 #1
> [ 1.572259] Workqueue: events test_abba_work
> [ 1.572833] Call Trace:
> [ 1.573167] dump_stack+0x16/0x18
> [ 1.573617] __warn+0xa0/0xb7
> [ 1.574017] ? __ww_mutex_wakeup_for_backoff+0x31/0x7a
> [ 1.574705] warn_slowpath_null+0x11/0x16
> [ 1.575238] __ww_mutex_wakeup_for_backoff+0x31/0x7a
> [ 1.575897] __ww_mutex_lock+0x2f3/0xb63
> [ 1.576559] ? wake_up_q+0x25/0x40
> [ 1.577012] ? __might_sleep+0x6c/0x73
> [ 1.577518] ww_mutex_lock+0x34/0x3b
> [ 1.577996] ? test_abba_work+0x109/0x182
> [ 1.578535] test_abba_work+0x109/0x182
That looks like the lockdep_assert_held(&lock->wait_lock) in
__ww_mutex_wakeup_for_backoff().
That should be solved the below commit, which is also present in both
mainline and -next.
---
commit b9c16a0e1f733c97e48798b2a9362c485bb3b731
Author: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Date: Tue Jan 17 16:06:09 2017 +0100
locking/mutex: Fix lockdep_assert_held() fail
In commit:
659cf9f5824a ("locking/ww_mutex: Optimize ww-mutexes by waking at most one waiter for backoff when acquiring the lock")
I replaced a comment with a lockdep_assert_held(). However it turns out
we hide that lock from lockdep for hysterical raisins, which results
in the assertion always firing.
Remove the old debug code as lockdep will easily spot the abuse it was
meant to catch, which will make the lock visible to lockdep and make
the assertion work as intended.
Reported-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Nicolai Haehnle <Nicolai.Haehnle@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Fixes: 659cf9f5824a ("locking/ww_mutex: Optimize ww-mutexes by waking at most one waiter for backoff when acquiring the lock")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170117150609.GB32474@worktop
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.h b/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.h
index a459faa48987..4174417d5309 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.h
@@ -26,20 +26,3 @@ extern void mutex_remove_waiter(struct mutex *lock, struct mutex_waiter *waiter,
extern void debug_mutex_unlock(struct mutex *lock);
extern void debug_mutex_init(struct mutex *lock, const char *name,
struct lock_class_key *key);
-
-#define spin_lock_mutex(lock, flags) \
- do { \
- struct mutex *l = container_of(lock, struct mutex, wait_lock); \
- \
- DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(in_interrupt()); \
- local_irq_save(flags); \
- arch_spin_lock(&(lock)->rlock.raw_lock);\
- DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(l->magic != l); \
- } while (0)
-
-#define spin_unlock_mutex(lock, flags) \
- do { \
- arch_spin_unlock(&(lock)->rlock.raw_lock); \
- local_irq_restore(flags); \
- preempt_check_resched(); \
- } while (0)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index 935116723a3d..705e06fe5e6c 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -325,8 +325,6 @@ __ww_mutex_wakeup_for_backoff(struct mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx)
static __always_inline void
ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
{
- unsigned long flags;
-
ww_mutex_lock_acquired(lock, ctx);
lock->ctx = ctx;
@@ -350,9 +348,9 @@ ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
* Uh oh, we raced in fastpath, wake up everyone in this case,
* so they can see the new lock->ctx.
*/
- spin_lock_mutex(&lock->base.wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock(&lock->base.wait_lock);
__ww_mutex_wakeup_for_backoff(&lock->base, ctx);
- spin_unlock_mutex(&lock->base.wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock(&lock->base.wait_lock);
}
/*
@@ -740,7 +738,6 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx, const bool use_ww_ctx)
{
struct mutex_waiter waiter;
- unsigned long flags;
bool first = false;
struct ww_mutex *ww;
int ret;
@@ -766,7 +763,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
return 0;
}
- spin_lock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
/*
* After waiting to acquire the wait_lock, try again.
*/
@@ -830,7 +827,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
goto err;
}
- spin_unlock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
schedule_preempt_disabled();
/*
@@ -853,9 +850,9 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
(first && mutex_optimistic_spin(lock, ww_ctx, use_ww_ctx, &waiter)))
break;
- spin_lock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
}
- spin_lock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
acquired:
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
@@ -872,7 +869,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx)
ww_mutex_set_context_slowpath(ww, ww_ctx);
- spin_unlock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
preempt_enable();
return 0;
@@ -880,7 +877,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
mutex_remove_waiter(lock, &waiter, current);
err_early_backoff:
- spin_unlock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
debug_mutex_free_waiter(&waiter);
mutex_release(&lock->dep_map, 1, ip);
preempt_enable();
@@ -999,8 +996,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ww_mutex_lock_interruptible);
static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigned long ip)
{
struct task_struct *next = NULL;
- unsigned long owner, flags;
DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
+ unsigned long owner;
mutex_release(&lock->dep_map, 1, ip);
@@ -1035,7 +1032,7 @@ static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigne
owner = old;
}
- spin_lock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
debug_mutex_unlock(lock);
if (!list_empty(&lock->wait_list)) {
/* get the first entry from the wait-list: */
@@ -1052,7 +1049,7 @@ static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigne
if (owner & MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF)
__mutex_handoff(lock, next);
- spin_unlock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
wake_up_q(&wake_q);
}
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.h b/kernel/locking/mutex.h
index 4410a4af42a3..6ebc1902f779 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.h
@@ -9,10 +9,6 @@
* !CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES case. Most of them are NOPs:
*/
-#define spin_lock_mutex(lock, flags) \
- do { spin_lock(lock); (void)(flags); } while (0)
-#define spin_unlock_mutex(lock, flags) \
- do { spin_unlock(lock); (void)(flags); } while (0)
#define mutex_remove_waiter(lock, waiter, task) \
__list_del((waiter)->list.prev, (waiter)->list.next)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists