linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v11 14/26] locking/lockdep, cpu/hotplus: Use a weaker annotation in AP thread

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]

Message-ID: <20240129042052.GA64402@system.software.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 13:20:52 +0900
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul@...com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel_team@...ynix.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
	will@...nel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, joel@...lfernandes.org,
	sashal@...nel.org, daniel.vetter@...ll.ch, duyuyang@...il.com,
	johannes.berg@...el.com, tj@...nel.org, tytso@....edu,
	willy@...radead.org, david@...morbit.com, amir73il@...il.com,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, kernel-team@....com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...nel.org, minchan@...nel.org,
	hannes@...xchg.org, vdavydov.dev@...il.com, sj@...nel.org,
	jglisse@...hat.com, dennis@...nel.org, cl@...ux.com,
	penberg@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
	ngupta@...are.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	josef@...icpanda.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, jack@...e.cz, jlayton@...nel.org,
	dan.j.williams@...el.com, hch@...radead.org, djwong@...nel.org,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, rodrigosiqueiramelo@...il.com,
	melissa.srw@...il.com, hamohammed.sa@...il.com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com,
	chris.p.wilson@...el.com, gwan-gyeong.mun@...el.com,
	max.byungchul.park@...il.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
	longman@...hat.com, hdanton@...a.com, her0gyugyu@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 14/26] locking/lockdep, cpu/hotplus: Use a weaker
 annotation in AP thread

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 06:30:02PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24 2024 at 20:59, Byungchul Park wrote:
> 
> Why is lockdep in the subsystem prefix here? You are changing the CPU
> hotplug (not hotplus) code, right?

I will fix the typo ;( Thank you.

I referred to the commit cb92173d1f047. I will remove the prefix if the
way is more desirable.

> > cb92173d1f0 ("locking/lockdep, cpu/hotplug: Annotate AP thread") was
> > introduced to make lockdep_assert_cpus_held() work in AP thread.
> >
> > However, the annotation is too strong for that purpose. We don't have to
> > use more than try lock annotation for that.
> 
> This lacks a proper explanation why this is too strong.

rwsem_acquire() implies:

   1. might be a waiter on contention of the lock.
   2. enter to the critical section of the lock.

All we need in here is to act 2, not 1. That's why I suggested trylock
version of annotation for that purpose.

Now that dept partially replies on lockdep annotaions for the waiters
and events, dept is interpeting rwsem_acquire() as a potential waiter
and reports a deadlock by the wait.

Of course, the first priority should be not to change the current
behavior. I think the change from non-trylock to trylock for the
annotation won't. Or am I missing something?

	Byungchul

> > Furthermore, now that Dept was introduced, false positive alarms was
> > reported by that. Replaced it with try lock annotation.
> 
> I still have zero idea what this is about.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx