linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lockdep: annotate rcu_read

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: <46C5ED69.6060604@acm.org>
Date:	Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:48:09 -0500
From:	Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, 123.oleg@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>, josht@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: annotate rcu_read_{,un}lock()

Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 09:56:45AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>   
>> On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 09:01 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 04:25:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>       
>>>> There seem to be some unbalanced rcu_read_{,un}lock() issues of late,
>>>> how about doing something like this:
>>>>         
>>> This will break when rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() are invoked
>>> from NMI/SMI handlers -- the raw_local_irq_save() in lock_acquire() will
>>> not mask NMIs or SMIs.
>>>
>>> One approach would be to check for being in an NMI/SMI handler, and
>>> to avoid calling lock_acquire() and lock_release() in those cases.
>>>       
>> It seems:
>>
>> #define nmi_enter()		do { lockdep_off(); __irq_enter(); } while (0)
>> #define nmi_exit()		do { __irq_exit(); lockdep_on(); } while (0)
>>
>> Should make it all work out just fine. (for NMIs at least, /me fully
>> ignorant of the workings of SMIs)
>>     
>
> Very good point, at least for NMIs on i386 and x86_64.  Can't say that I
> know much about SMIs myself.  Or about whatever equivalents to NMIs and
> SMIs might exist on other platforms.  :-/  Of course, the other platforms
> could be handled by making the RCU lockdep operate only on i386 and x86_64
> if required.
>
> Corey, any advice on SMI handlers?  Is there something like nmi_enter()
> and nmi_exit() that allows disabing lockdep?
>   
You will certainly need something like nmi_enter() and nmi_exit() for 
SMIs, since they can occur at any time like NMIs.  As far as anything 
else, you just have to be extremely careful and remember that it can 
occur anyplace.  But you already know that :).

It would be nice if the PowerPC board vendors would tie watchdog 
pretimeouts and some type of timer into the SMI input.  It would make 
debugging certain problems much easier.  And all those Marvell bridge 
chips have a watchdog pretimeout and I haven't seen any board vendor 
wire it up :(.

-corey

-
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/