| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:59:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: avoid using smp_processor_id() in preemptible
code (nr_iowait_cpu) v4
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:29:50 +0300 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> wrote:
> Fix
>
> BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: s2disk/3392
> caller is nr_iowait_cpu+0xe/0x1e
> Pid: 3392, comm: s2disk Not tainted 2.6.35-rc3-dbg-00106-ga75e02b #2
> Call Trace:
> [<c1184c55>] debug_smp_processor_id+0xa5/0xbc
> [<c10282a5>] nr_iowait_cpu+0xe/0x1e
> [<c104ab7c>] update_ts_time_stats+0x32/0x6c
> [<c104ac73>] get_cpu_idle_time_us+0x36/0x58
> [<c124229b>] get_cpu_idle_time+0x12/0x74
> [<c1242963>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0xc3/0x2dc
> [<c1240437>] __cpufreq_governor+0x51/0x85
> [<c1241190>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x10c/0x13d
> [<c12413d3>] cpufreq_add_dev_interface+0x212/0x233
> [<c1241b1e>] ? handle_update+0x0/0xd
> [<c1241a18>] cpufreq_add_dev+0x34b/0x35a
> [<c103c973>] ? schedule_delayed_work_on+0x11/0x13
> [<c12c14db>] cpufreq_cpu_callback+0x59/0x63
> [<c1042f39>] notifier_call_chain+0x26/0x48
> [<c1042f7d>] __raw_notifier_call_chain+0xe/0x10
> [<c102efb9>] __cpu_notify+0x15/0x29
> [<c102efda>] cpu_notify+0xd/0xf
> [<c12bfb30>] _cpu_up+0xaf/0xd2
> [<c12b3ad4>] enable_nonboot_cpus+0x3d/0x94
> [<c1055eef>] hibernation_snapshot+0x104/0x1a2
> [<c1058b49>] snapshot_ioctl+0x24b/0x53e
> [<c1028ad1>] ? sub_preempt_count+0x7c/0x89
> [<c10ab91d>] vfs_ioctl+0x2e/0x8c
> [<c10588fe>] ? snapshot_ioctl+0x0/0x53e
> [<c10ac2c7>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x42f/0x45a
> [<c10a0ba5>] ? fsnotify_modify+0x4f/0x5a
> [<c11e9dc3>] ? tty_write+0x0/0x1d0
> [<c10a12d6>] ? vfs_write+0xa2/0xda
> [<c10ac333>] sys_ioctl+0x41/0x62
> [<c10027d3>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x2d
>
> The initial fix was to use get_cpu/put_cpu in nr_iowait_cpu. However,
> Arjan stated that "the bug is that it needs to be nr_iowait_cpu(int cpu)".
>
> This patch introduces nr_iowait_cpu(int cpu) and changes to its callers.
>
> Arjan also pointed out that we can't use get_cpu/put_cpu in update_ts_time_stats
> since we "pick the current cpu, rather than the one denoted by ts" in that case.
> To match given *ts and cpu denoted by *ts we use new field in the struct tick_sched: int cpu.
>
>
> ...
>
> struct tick_sched *tick_get_tick_sched(int cpu)
> {
> + /*FIXME: Arjan van de Ven:
> + can we do this bit once, when the ts structure gets initialized?*/
> + per_cpu(tick_cpu_sched, cpu).cpu = cpu;
> return &per_cpu(tick_cpu_sched, cpu);
> }
That's just weird. And by doing a write it does require that this
cahcheline be probably-read and written back regularly, which is more
bus traffic.
It should be OK to initialise these guys with a for_each_possible_cpu()
loop in a new module_init() function in tick-sched.c - if someone runs
update_ts_time_stats() before the initcalls then conceivably the
`swapper' process's accounting will go a little bit wrong, but I doubt
it.
Still, it'd be better to do it earlier, I guess. tick_init() is called
super-early and that would be a good place. tick_init() is presently a
no-op if !CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS, but all this code depends on
CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS anwyay.
So how does this look? If "OK" then would you be able to test it please?
[ Sigh. The field tick_sched.cpu shouldn't even exist on
uniprocessor builds. Ifdeffing it away is trivial and a bit messy,
but it's still only a partial solution. Passing the `cpu' argument
to nr_iowait_cpu() will generate additional code, and it's unneeded
on uniprocessor builds.]
include/linux/tick.h | 1 +
kernel/time/tick-common.c | 1 +
kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 11 ++++++++---
3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff -puN include/linux/tick.h~cpuidle-avoid-using-smp_processor_id-in-preemptible-code-nr_iowait_cpu-v4-fix include/linux/tick.h
--- a/include/linux/tick.h~cpuidle-avoid-using-smp_processor_id-in-preemptible-code-nr_iowait_cpu-v4-fix
+++ a/include/linux/tick.h
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ struct tick_sched {
};
extern void __init tick_init(void);
+extern void __init tick_sched_init(void);
extern int tick_is_oneshot_available(void);
extern struct tick_device *tick_get_device(int cpu);
diff -puN kernel/time/tick-sched.c~cpuidle-avoid-using-smp_processor_id-in-preemptible-code-nr_iowait_cpu-v4-fix kernel/time/tick-sched.c
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c~cpuidle-avoid-using-smp_processor_id-in-preemptible-code-nr_iowait_cpu-v4-fix
+++ a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -38,9 +38,6 @@ static ktime_t last_jiffies_update;
struct tick_sched *tick_get_tick_sched(int cpu)
{
- /*FIXME: Arjan van de Ven:
- can we do this bit once, when the ts structure gets initialized?*/
- per_cpu(tick_cpu_sched, cpu).cpu = cpu;
return &per_cpu(tick_cpu_sched, cpu);
}
@@ -880,3 +877,11 @@ int tick_check_oneshot_change(int allow_
tick_nohz_switch_to_nohz();
return 0;
}
+
+void __init tick_sched_init(void)
+{
+ int cpu;
+
+ for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
+ per_cpu(tick_cpu_sched, cpu).cpu = cpu;
+}
diff -puN kernel/time/tick-common.c~cpuidle-avoid-using-smp_processor_id-in-preemptible-code-nr_iowait_cpu-v4-fix kernel/time/tick-common.c
--- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c~cpuidle-avoid-using-smp_processor_id-in-preemptible-code-nr_iowait_cpu-v4-fix
+++ a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
@@ -413,4 +413,5 @@ static struct notifier_block tick_notifi
void __init tick_init(void)
{
clockevents_register_notifier(&tick_notifier);
+ tick_sched_init();
}
_
--
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