linux-kernel - [PATCH] lib: atomic64: Initialize locks statically to fix early users

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1355989188-17665-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Wed, 19 Dec 2012 23:39:48 -0800
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	paul@...an.com, vaibhav.bedia@...com,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: [PATCH] lib: atomic64: Initialize locks statically to fix early users

The atomic64 library uses a handful of static spin locks to
implement atomic 64-bit operations on architectures without
support for atomic 64-bit instructions. Unfortunately, the
spinlocks are initialized in a pure initcall and that is too late
for the vfs namespace code which wants to use atomic64 operations
before the initcall is run (introduced by 8823c07 "vfs: Add setns
support for the mount namespace").

This leads to BUG messages such as:

BUG: spinlock bad magic on CPU#0, swapper/0/0
 lock: atomic64_lock+0x240/0x400, .magic: 00000000, .owner: <none>/-1, .owner_cpu: 0
[<c001af64>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf0) from [<c02c2010>] (do_raw_spin_lock+0x158/0x198)
[<c02c2010>] (do_raw_spin_lock+0x158/0x198) from [<c04d89ec>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4c/0x58)
[<c04d89ec>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4c/0x58) from [<c02cabf0>] (atomic64_add_return+0x30/0x5c)
[<c02cabf0>] (atomic64_add_return+0x30/0x5c) from [<c0124564>] (alloc_mnt_ns.clone.14+0x44/0xac)
[<c0124564>] (alloc_mnt_ns.clone.14+0x44/0xac) from [<c0124f4c>] (create_mnt_ns+0xc/0x54)
[<c0124f4c>] (create_mnt_ns+0xc/0x54) from [<c06f31a4>] (mnt_init+0x120/0x1d4)
[<c06f31a4>] (mnt_init+0x120/0x1d4) from [<c06f2d50>] (vfs_caches_init+0xe0/0x10c)
[<c06f2d50>] (vfs_caches_init+0xe0/0x10c) from [<c06d4798>] (start_kernel+0x29c/0x300)
[<c06d4798>] (start_kernel+0x29c/0x300) from [<80008078>] (0x80008078)

coming out early on during boot when spinlock debugging is enabled.

Fix this problem by initializing the spinlocks statically at
compile time.

Reported-by: Vaibhav Bedia <vaibhav.bedia@...com>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Bedia <vaibhav.bedia@...com>
Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
---

Sorry Andrew, I couldn't find a maintainer of this file so I
am picking on you.

 lib/atomic64.c | 17 +++++------------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/atomic64.c b/lib/atomic64.c
index 9785378..08a4f06 100644
--- a/lib/atomic64.c
+++ b/lib/atomic64.c
@@ -31,7 +31,11 @@
 static union {
 	raw_spinlock_t lock;
 	char pad[L1_CACHE_BYTES];
-} atomic64_lock[NR_LOCKS] __cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
+} atomic64_lock[NR_LOCKS] __cacheline_aligned_in_smp = {
+	[0 ... (NR_LOCKS - 1)] = {
+		.lock =  __RAW_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(atomic64_lock.lock),
+	},
+};
 
 static inline raw_spinlock_t *lock_addr(const atomic64_t *v)
 {
@@ -173,14 +177,3 @@ int atomic64_add_unless(atomic64_t *v, long long a, long long u)
 	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(atomic64_add_unless);
-
-static int init_atomic64_lock(void)
-{
-	int i;
-
-	for (i = 0; i < NR_LOCKS; ++i)
-		raw_spin_lock_init(&atomic64_lock[i].lock);
-	return 0;
-}
-
-pure_initcall(init_atomic64_lock);
-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

--
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/