Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1001051108150.26884@sister.anvils>
Date:	Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:21:00 +0000 (GMT)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
cc:	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: Re: [PATCH v2] futex: remove rw parameter from get_futex_key()

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > 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?

It crossed my mind to do it that way too - honest!

I pushed it away thinking that some app may sometimes be using
mprotect PROT_READ or PROT_NONE over these areas, for one reason
or another - perhaps debugging or self-monitoring.

But I've no experience of futex use at all: if futexperts think it's
reasonable always to get_futex_key() for writing, then that is much
the neatest way to deal with both zero page and private file cases.

Over to the experts...

Hugh

> 
> 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