[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100105162633.45A2.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:32:43 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2] futex: remove rw parameter from get_futex_key()
Hi
sorry very delayed responce, I've review futex code again.
> > Hm. probably we need to discuss more.
> >
> > Firstly, if we assume current glibc implimentation, you are right,
> > we can assume userland always initialize the page explicitly before using
> > futex. then we never seen zero page in futex.
> >
> > but, I don't think futex itself assume it now. at least man page
> > doesn't describe such limilation. so, if you prefer bail and man fix,
> > I'm acceptable maybe.
>
> Here's another worry with the current futex implementation,
> which might help me to decide which way to jump on the ZERO_PAGE.
>
> Originally, a futex on a MAP_PRIVATE (!VM_MAYSHARE) area was necessarily
> FUT_OFF_MMSHARED. Nowadays, with the get_user_pages_fast implementation,
> we have no idea whether the vma is VM_MAYSHARE or not. So if a futex is
> placed in a private area backed by a file, then it could be regarded as
> FUT_OFF_INODE at futex_wait() time, but FUT_OFF_MMSHARED at futex_wake()
> time.
very true!
> Perhaps that's no problem at all, it's a long time since I was involved
> with futexes, I think you and Peter will grasp the consequences quicker
> than I shall.
>
> But it seems no more improbable than the ZERO_PAGE case: some app
> might place its futexes in the .data section of the executable,
> which is a private mapping of the executable file.
>
> If this case is also an issue, then perhaps we just need to update
> the man page to say that whatever is responsible for initializing a
> futex does need to write to it (or the page it's in) before it's used,
> otherwise behaviour is undefined. (But we should then use the -EFAULT
> patch above, we'd all prefer an error to busylooping.)
I have a question. Why can't we use write mode get_user_pages_fast()?
I mean glibc always mekes write access before calling futex. it mean
write mode get_user_pages() doesn't mekes cow on practical usage.
Following patch is implemented such policy. What do you think?
>From c3e2dfdff84b9b720e646fd6dd3c38fff293c7e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:33:00 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] futex: remove rw parameter from get_futex_key()
Currently, futex have two problem.
A) current futex doesn't handle private file mappings properly.
get_futex_key() use PageAnon() to distinguish file and anon. it can
makes following bad scenario.
1) thread-A call futex(private-mapping, FUTEX_WAIT). it makes to
sleep on file mapping object.
2) thread-B write a variable and it makes cow.
3) thread-B call futex(private-mapping, FUTEX_WAKE). it wake up
sleeped thread on the anonymous page. (but it's nothing)
following testcase reproduce this issue.
actual result)
FUTEX_WAIT thread never wake up.
expect result)
FUTEX_WAIT thread wake up by FUTEX_WAKE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <syscall.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <linux/futex.h>
#include <pthread.h>
char pad[4096] = {1};
int val = 1;
char pad2[4096] = {1};
void * futex_wait(void *arg)
{
int ret;
fprintf(stderr, "futex wait\n");
ret = syscall( SYS_futex, &val, FUTEX_WAIT, 1, NULL, NULL, NULL);
if (ret != 0 && errno != EWOULDBLOCK) {
perror("futex error.\n");
exit(1);
}
fprintf(stderr, "futex_wait: ret = %d, errno = %d\n", ret, errno);
return NULL;
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
pthread_t thr;
int ret;
ret = pthread_create(&thr, NULL, futex_wait, NULL);
if (ret < 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "pthread_create error\n");
exit(1);
}
sleep(10);
fprintf(stderr, "futex wake\n");
val = 2;
ret = syscall( SYS_futex, &val, FUTEX_WAKE, 1, NULL, NULL, NULL);
fprintf(stderr, "futex_wake: ret = %d, errno = %d\n", ret, errno);
fprintf(stderr, "join\n");
pthread_join(thr, NULL);
return 0;
}
--------------------------------------------------------------------
B) current futex doesn't handle zero page properly.
read mode get_user_pages() can return zero page. but current futex code doesn't
handle it at all. Then, zero page makes infinite loop internally.
following testcase can reproduce this issue.
actual result)
FUTEX_WAIT never return and waste cpu time 100%.
expected result)
FUTEX_WAIT return immediately.
------------------------------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <syscall.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <linux/futex.h>
#include <pthread.h>
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
long page_size;
int ret;
void *buf;
page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
buf = mmap(NULL, page_size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, 0, 0);
if (buf == (void *)-1) {
perror("mmap error.\n");
exit(1);
}
fprintf(stderr, "futex wait\n");
ret = syscall( SYS_futex, buf, FUTEX_WAIT, 1, NULL, NULL, NULL);
if (ret != 0 && errno != EWOULDBLOCK) {
perror("futex error.\n");
exit(1);
}
fprintf(stderr, "futex_wait: ret = %d, errno = %d\n", ret, errno);
return 0;
}
------------------------------------------------------------------
The solution is to use write mode get_user_page() always for page lookup.
It prevent to lookup both file page of private mappings and zero page.
performance concern:
Probaly very little. because glibc always initialize variables for futex
before to call futex(). It mean glibc user never seen the overhead of this
patch.
compatibility concern:
This patch have few compatibility break. After this patch, FUTEX_WAIT require
writable access to futex variables (read-only mappings makes EFAULT).
But practically it's no problem. again glibc always initalize variables for futex
explicitly. nobody use read-only mappings.
Reported-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
---
kernel/futex.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
index 8e3c3ff..d9b3a22 100644
--- a/kernel/futex.c
+++ b/kernel/futex.c
@@ -203,8 +203,6 @@ static void drop_futex_key_refs(union futex_key *key)
* @uaddr: virtual address of the futex
* @fshared: 0 for a PROCESS_PRIVATE futex, 1 for PROCESS_SHARED
* @key: address where result is stored.
- * @rw: mapping needs to be read/write (values: VERIFY_READ,
- * VERIFY_WRITE)
*
* Returns a negative error code or 0
* The key words are stored in *key on success.
@@ -216,7 +214,7 @@ static void drop_futex_key_refs(union futex_key *key)
* lock_page() might sleep, the caller should not hold a spinlock.
*/
static int
-get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key, int rw)
+get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key)
{
unsigned long address = (unsigned long)uaddr;
struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;
@@ -239,7 +237,7 @@ get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key, int rw)
* but access_ok() should be faster than find_vma()
*/
if (!fshared) {
- if (unlikely(!access_ok(rw, uaddr, sizeof(u32))))
+ if (unlikely(!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, uaddr, sizeof(u32))))
return -EFAULT;
key->private.mm = mm;
key->private.address = address;
@@ -248,7 +246,7 @@ get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key, int rw)
}
again:
- err = get_user_pages_fast(address, 1, rw == VERIFY_WRITE, &page);
+ err = get_user_pages_fast(address, 1, 1, &page);
if (err < 0)
return err;
@@ -867,7 +865,7 @@ static int futex_wake(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, int nr_wake, u32 bitset)
if (!bitset)
return -EINVAL;
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key, VERIFY_READ);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out;
@@ -913,10 +911,10 @@ futex_wake_op(u32 __user *uaddr1, int fshared, u32 __user *uaddr2,
int ret, op_ret;
retry:
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1, VERIFY_READ);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out;
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2, VERIFY_WRITE);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out_put_key1;
@@ -1175,11 +1173,10 @@ retry:
pi_state = NULL;
}
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1, VERIFY_READ);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out;
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2,
- requeue_pi ? VERIFY_WRITE : VERIFY_READ);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out_put_key1;
@@ -1738,7 +1735,7 @@ static int futex_wait_setup(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 val, int fshared,
*/
retry:
q->key = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q->key, VERIFY_READ);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q->key);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
return ret;
@@ -1904,7 +1901,7 @@ static int futex_lock_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared,
q.requeue_pi_key = NULL;
retry:
q.key = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q.key, VERIFY_WRITE);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q.key);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out;
@@ -2023,7 +2020,7 @@ retry:
if ((uval & FUTEX_TID_MASK) != task_pid_vnr(current))
return -EPERM;
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key, VERIFY_WRITE);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out;
@@ -2215,7 +2212,7 @@ static int futex_wait_requeue_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared,
rt_waiter.task = NULL;
key2 = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
- ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2, VERIFY_WRITE);
+ ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2);
if (unlikely(ret != 0))
goto out;
--
1.6.5.2
--
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