| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1202805777.13118.26.camel@iris.sw.ru>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:42:57 +0300
From: "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...ru>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
vatsa <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: lock_task_group_list() can be called from the atomic context
Acked-by: Denis V. Lunev <den@...nvz.org>
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 14:33 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 15:09 +0300, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
>
> Curious, I hadn't yet seen it... Does the below fix it?
>
> > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context
> > at /home/den/src/linux-netns26/kernel/mutex.c:209
> > in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0
> > no locks held by swapper/0.
> > Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24 #304
> >
> > Call Trace:
> > <IRQ> [<ffffffff80252d1e>] ? __debug_show_held_locks+0x15/0x27
> > [<ffffffff8022c2a8>] __might_sleep+0xc0/0xdf
> > [<ffffffff8049f1df>] mutex_lock_nested+0x28/0x2a9
> > [<ffffffff80231294>] sched_destroy_group+0x18/0xea
> > [<ffffffff8023e835>] sched_destroy_user+0xd/0xf
> > [<ffffffff8023e8c1>] free_uid+0x8a/0xab
> > [<ffffffff80233e24>] __put_task_struct+0x3f/0xd3
> > [<ffffffff80236708>] delayed_put_task_struct+0x23/0x25
> > [<ffffffff8026fda7>] __rcu_process_callbacks+0x8d/0x215
> > [<ffffffff8026ff52>] rcu_process_callbacks+0x23/0x44
> > [<ffffffff8023a2ae>] __do_softirq+0x79/0xf8
> > [<ffffffff8020f8c3>] ? profile_pc+0x2a/0x67
> > [<ffffffff8020d38c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
> > [<ffffffff8020f689>] do_softirq+0x61/0x9c
> > [<ffffffff8023a233>] irq_exit+0x51/0x53
> > [<ffffffff8021bd1a>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x77/0xad
> > [<ffffffff8020ce3b>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x6b/0x70
> > <EOI> [<ffffffff8020b0dd>] ? default_idle+0x43/0x76
> > [<ffffffff8020b0db>] ? default_idle+0x41/0x76
> > [<ffffffff8020b09a>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x76
> > [<ffffffff8020b186>] ? cpu_idle+0x76/0x98
>
> separate the tg->shares protection from the task_group lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> ---
> kernel/sched.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -232,10 +232,10 @@ static struct cfs_rq *init_cfs_rq_p[NR_C
> static struct sched_rt_entity *init_sched_rt_entity_p[NR_CPUS];
> static struct rt_rq *init_rt_rq_p[NR_CPUS];
>
> -/* task_group_mutex serializes add/remove of task groups and also changes to
> +/* task_group_lock serializes add/remove of task groups and also changes to
> * a task group's cpu shares.
> */
> -static DEFINE_MUTEX(task_group_mutex);
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(task_group_lock);
>
> /* doms_cur_mutex serializes access to doms_cur[] array */
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(doms_cur_mutex);
> @@ -295,16 +295,6 @@ static inline void set_task_rq(struct ta
> p->rt.parent = task_group(p)->rt_se[cpu];
> }
>
> -static inline void lock_task_group_list(void)
> -{
> - mutex_lock(&task_group_mutex);
> -}
> -
> -static inline void unlock_task_group_list(void)
> -{
> - mutex_unlock(&task_group_mutex);
> -}
> -
> static inline void lock_doms_cur(void)
> {
> mutex_lock(&doms_cur_mutex);
> @@ -318,8 +308,6 @@ static inline void unlock_doms_cur(void)
> #else
>
> static inline void set_task_rq(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int cpu) { }
> -static inline void lock_task_group_list(void) { }
> -static inline void unlock_task_group_list(void) { }
> static inline void lock_doms_cur(void) { }
> static inline void unlock_doms_cur(void) { }
>
> @@ -7571,6 +7559,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo
> struct rt_rq *rt_rq;
> struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se;
> struct rq *rq;
> + unsigned long flags;
> int i;
>
> tg = kzalloc(sizeof(*tg), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -7620,7 +7609,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo
> init_tg_rt_entry(rq, tg, rt_rq, rt_se, i, 0);
> }
>
> - lock_task_group_list();
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> rq = cpu_rq(i);
> cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
> @@ -7629,7 +7618,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo
> list_add_rcu(&rt_rq->leaf_rt_rq_list, &rq->leaf_rt_rq_list);
> }
> list_add_rcu(&tg->list, &task_groups);
> - unlock_task_group_list();
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
>
> return tg;
>
> @@ -7650,9 +7639,10 @@ void sched_destroy_group(struct task_gro
> {
> struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = NULL;
> struct rt_rq *rt_rq = NULL;
> + unsigned long flags;
> int i;
>
> - lock_task_group_list();
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
> list_del_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list);
> @@ -7660,7 +7650,7 @@ void sched_destroy_group(struct task_gro
> list_del_rcu(&rt_rq->leaf_rt_rq_list);
> }
> list_del_rcu(&tg->list);
> - unlock_task_group_list();
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
>
> BUG_ON(!cfs_rq);
>
> @@ -7728,13 +7718,16 @@ static void set_se_shares(struct sched_e
> }
> }
>
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(shares_mutex);
> +
> int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_group *tg, unsigned long shares)
> {
> int i;
> struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq;
> struct rq *rq;
> + unsigned long flags;
>
> - lock_task_group_list();
> + mutex_lock(&shares_mutex);
> if (tg->shares == shares)
> goto done;
>
> @@ -7746,10 +7739,12 @@ int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_g
> * load_balance_fair) from referring to this group first,
> * by taking it off the rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list on each cpu.
> */
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
> list_del_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list);
> }
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
>
> /* wait for any ongoing reference to this group to finish */
> synchronize_sched();
> @@ -7769,13 +7764,15 @@ int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_g
> * Enable load balance activity on this group, by inserting it back on
> * each cpu's rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list.
> */
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> rq = cpu_rq(i);
> cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
> list_add_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list, &rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list);
> }
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
> done:
> - unlock_task_group_list();
> + mutex_unlock(&shares_mutex);
> return 0;
> }
>
>
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists