| 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: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 19:24:04 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, jmoyer@...hat.com, zab@...hat.com,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 13/31] workqueue: update synchronization rules on worker_pool_idr
Make worker_pool_idr protected by workqueue_lock for writes and
sched-RCU protected for reads. Lockdep assertions are added to
for_each_pool() and get_work_pool() and all their users are converted
to either hold workqueue_lock or disable preemption/irq.
worker_pool_assign_id() is updated to hold workqueue_lock when
allocating a pool ID. As idr_get_new() always performs RCU-safe
assignment, this is enough on the writer side.
As standard pools are never destroyed, there's nothing to do on that
side.
The locking is superflous at this point. This is to help
implementation of unbound pools/pwqs with custom attributes.
This patch doesn't introduce any behavior changes.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index ff51c59..2645218 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -282,9 +282,16 @@ static inline int __next_wq_cpu(int cpu, const struct cpumask *mask,
* for_each_pool - iterate through all worker_pools in the system
* @pool: iteration cursor
* @id: integer used for iteration
+ *
+ * This must be called either with workqueue_lock held or sched RCU read
+ * locked. If the pool needs to be used beyond the locking in effect, the
+ * caller is responsible for guaranteeing that the pool stays online.
+ *
+ * The if clause exists only for the lockdep assertion and can be ignored.
*/
#define for_each_pool(pool, id) \
- idr_for_each_entry(&worker_pool_idr, pool, id)
+ idr_for_each_entry(&worker_pool_idr, pool, id) \
+ if (({ assert_rcu_or_wq_lock(); true; }))
/**
* for_each_pwq - iterate through all pool_workqueues of the specified workqueue
@@ -430,8 +437,10 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct worker_pool [NR_STD_WORKER_POOLS],
cpu_std_worker_pools);
static struct worker_pool unbound_std_worker_pools[NR_STD_WORKER_POOLS];
-/* idr of all pools */
-static DEFINE_MUTEX(worker_pool_idr_mutex);
+/*
+ * idr of all pools. Modifications are protected by workqueue_lock. Read
+ * accesses are protected by sched-RCU protected.
+ */
static DEFINE_IDR(worker_pool_idr);
static int worker_thread(void *__worker);
@@ -454,23 +463,18 @@ static int worker_pool_assign_id(struct worker_pool *pool)
{
int ret;
- mutex_lock(&worker_pool_idr_mutex);
- idr_pre_get(&worker_pool_idr, GFP_KERNEL);
- ret = idr_get_new(&worker_pool_idr, pool, &pool->id);
- mutex_unlock(&worker_pool_idr_mutex);
+ do {
+ if (!idr_pre_get(&worker_pool_idr, GFP_KERNEL))
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ spin_lock_irq(&workqueue_lock);
+ ret = idr_get_new(&worker_pool_idr, pool, &pool->id);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&workqueue_lock);
+ } while (ret == -EAGAIN);
return ret;
}
-/*
- * Lookup worker_pool by id. The idr currently is built during boot and
- * never modified. Don't worry about locking for now.
- */
-static struct worker_pool *worker_pool_by_id(int pool_id)
-{
- return idr_find(&worker_pool_idr, pool_id);
-}
-
static struct worker_pool *get_std_worker_pool(int cpu, bool highpri)
{
struct worker_pool *pools = std_worker_pools(cpu);
@@ -584,13 +588,23 @@ static struct pool_workqueue *get_work_pwq(struct work_struct *work)
* @work: the work item of interest
*
* Return the worker_pool @work was last associated with. %NULL if none.
+ *
+ * Pools are created and destroyed under workqueue_lock, and allows read
+ * access under sched-RCU read lock. As such, this function should be
+ * called under workqueue_lock or with preemption disabled.
+ *
+ * All fields of the returned pool are accessible as long as the above
+ * mentioned locking is in effect. If the returned pool needs to be used
+ * beyond the critical section, the caller is responsible for ensuring the
+ * returned pool is and stays online.
*/
static struct worker_pool *get_work_pool(struct work_struct *work)
{
unsigned long data = atomic_long_read(&work->data);
- struct worker_pool *pool;
int pool_id;
+ assert_rcu_or_wq_lock();
+
if (data & WORK_STRUCT_PWQ)
return ((struct pool_workqueue *)
(data & WORK_STRUCT_WQ_DATA_MASK))->pool;
@@ -599,9 +613,7 @@ static struct worker_pool *get_work_pool(struct work_struct *work)
if (pool_id == WORK_OFFQ_POOL_NONE)
return NULL;
- pool = worker_pool_by_id(pool_id);
- WARN_ON_ONCE(!pool);
- return pool;
+ return idr_find(&worker_pool_idr, pool_id);
}
/**
@@ -2767,11 +2779,15 @@ static bool start_flush_work(struct work_struct *work, struct wq_barrier *barr)
struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
might_sleep();
+
+ local_irq_disable();
pool = get_work_pool(work);
- if (!pool)
+ if (!pool) {
+ local_irq_enable();
return false;
+ }
- spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock);
+ spin_lock(&pool->lock);
/* see the comment in try_to_grab_pending() with the same code */
pwq = get_work_pwq(work);
if (pwq) {
@@ -3414,19 +3430,22 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(workqueue_congested);
*/
unsigned int work_busy(struct work_struct *work)
{
- struct worker_pool *pool = get_work_pool(work);
+ struct worker_pool *pool;
unsigned long flags;
unsigned int ret = 0;
if (work_pending(work))
ret |= WORK_BUSY_PENDING;
+ local_irq_save(flags);
+ pool = get_work_pool(work);
if (pool) {
- spin_lock_irqsave(&pool->lock, flags);
+ spin_lock(&pool->lock);
if (find_worker_executing_work(pool, work))
ret |= WORK_BUSY_RUNNING;
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock(&pool->lock);
}
+ local_irq_restore(flags);
return ret;
}
--
1.8.1.2
--
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