| 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: <20090609152302.GA22784@Krystal>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 11:23:02 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
trenn@...e.de, sven.wegener@...aler.net,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
mingo@...e.hu, Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove rwsem lock from CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP call (second
call site)
* Dave Young (hidave.darkstar@...il.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Mathieu
> Desnoyers<mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> wrote:
> > * Dave Jones (davej@...hat.com) wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 08:48:45AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >>
> >> > > > >> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13475
> >> > > > >> Subject : suspend/hibernate lockdep warning
> >> > > > >> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=124393723321241&w=4
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I suspect the following commit, after revert this patch I test 5 times
> >> > > > without lockdep warnings.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > commit b14893a62c73af0eca414cfed505b8c09efc613c
> >> > > > Author: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
> >> > > > Date: Sun May 17 10:30:45 2009 -0400
> >> > > >
> >> > > > [CPUFREQ] fix timer teardown in ondemand governor
> >> > >
> >> > > The patch is probably not at fault here. I suspect it's some latent bug
> >> > > that simply got exposed by the change to cancel_delayed_work_sync(). In
> >> > > any case, Mathieu, can you take a look at this please?
> >> >
> >> > Yes, it's been looked at and discussed on the cpufreq ML. The short
> >> > answer is that they plan to re-engineer cpufreq and remove the policy
> >> > rwlock taken around almost every operations at the cpufreq level.
> >> >
> >> > The short-term solution, which is recognised as ugly, would be do to the
> >> > following before doing the cancel_delayed_work_sync() :
> >> >
> >> > unlock policy rwlock write lock
> >> >
> >> > lock policy rwlock write lock
> >> >
> >> > It basically works because this rwlock is unneeded for teardown, hence
> >> > the future re-work planned.
> >> >
> >> > I'm sorry I cannot prepare a patch current... I've got quite a few pages
> >> > of Ph.D. thesis due for the beginning of July.
> >>
> >> I'm kinda scared to touch this code at all for .30 due to the number of
> >> unexpected gotchas we seem to run into every time we touch something
> >> locking related. So I'm inclined to just live with the lockdep warning
> >> for .30, and see how the real fixes look for .31, and push them back
> >> as -stable updates if they work out.
> >>
> >>
> >> Venki, what are your thoughts?
> >>
> >
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > I've looked through the cpufreq code, and the following patch should
> > address the call site I've missed in commit
> > 42a06f2166f2f6f7bf04f32b4e823eacdceafdc9. I've followed all
> > __cpufreq_set_policy call sites within cpufreq.c to make sure they all
> > hold the rwsem write lock. An extra round of review would be good
> > though.
> >
> > Can someone try the following patch and see if it fixes the regression ?
>
> Bad news, I have tried the patch and It does not fix the regression.
>
Can you provide the lockdep error message you get with the patch
applied?
Thanks,
Mathieu
> > My test machine is currently busy running long formal verifications, and
> > therefore unavailable for kernel patch testing. It compiles fine on a
> > 2.6.30-rc5 kernel with my (now mainlined) cpufreq patches applied.
> >
> > Mathieu
> >
> >
> > remove rwsem lock from CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP call (second call site)
> >
> > commit 42a06f2166f2f6f7bf04f32b4e823eacdceafdc9
> >
> > Missed a call site for CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP to remove the rwlock taken around the
> > teardown. To make a long story short, the rwlock write-lock causes a circular
> > dependency with cancel_delayed_work_sync(), because the timer handler takes the
> > read lock.
> >
> > Note that all callers to __cpufreq_set_policy are taking the rwsem. All sysfs
> > callers (writers) hold the write rwsem at the earliest sysfs calling stage.
> >
> > However, the rwlock write-lock is not needed upon governor stop.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
> > CC: rjw@...k.pl
> > CC: mingo@...e.hu
> > CC: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
> > CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
> > CC: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
> > CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
> > CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
> > CC: trenn@...e.de
> > CC: sven.wegener@...aler.net
> > CC: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
> > CC: cpufreq@...r.kernel.org
> > ---
> > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 11 ++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6-lttng/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c 2009-06-08 10:20:48.000000000 -0400
> > +++ linux-2.6-lttng/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c 2009-06-08 10:48:52.000000000 -0400
> > @@ -1697,8 +1697,17 @@ static int __cpufreq_set_policy(struct c
> > dprintk("governor switch\n");
> >
> > /* end old governor */
> > - if (data->governor)
> > + if (data->governor) {
> > + /*
> > + * Need to release the rwsem around governor
> > + * stop due to lock dependency between
> > + * cancel_delayed_work_sync and the read lock
> > + * taken in the delayed work handler.
> > + */
> > + unlock_policy_rwsem_write(data->cpu);
> > __cpufreq_governor(data, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP);
> > + lock_policy_rwsem_write(data->cpu);
> > + }
> >
> > /* start new governor */
> > data->governor = policy->governor;
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mathieu Desnoyers
> > OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
> > --
> > 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/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
> dave
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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