linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 02/52] CPU hotplug: Provide lockless versions of callback registration functions

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: <20140217132608.GA30698@in.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:56:09 +0530
From:	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	paulus@...ba.org, oleg@...hat.com, mingo@...nel.org,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	tj@...nel.org, walken@...gle.com, ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linux@....linux.org.uk, rjw@...ysocki.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/52] CPU hotplug: Provide lockless versions of
 callback registration functions

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 01:19:23PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> The following method of CPU hotplug callback registration is not safe
> due to the possibility of an ABBA deadlock involving the cpu_add_remove_lock
> and the cpu_hotplug.lock.
> 
> 	get_online_cpus();
> 
> 	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> 		init_cpu(cpu);
> 
> 	register_cpu_notifier(&foobar_cpu_notifier);
> 
> 	put_online_cpus();
> 
> The deadlock is shown below:
> 
>           CPU 0                                         CPU 1
>           -----                                         -----
> 
>    Acquire cpu_hotplug.lock
>    [via get_online_cpus()]
> 
>                                               CPU online/offline operation
>                                               takes cpu_add_remove_lock
>                                               [via cpu_maps_update_begin()]
> 
> 
>    Try to acquire
>    cpu_add_remove_lock
>    [via register_cpu_notifier()]
> 
> 
>                                               CPU online/offline operation
>                                               tries to acquire cpu_hotplug.lock
>                                               [via cpu_hotplug_begin()]
> 
> 
>                             *** DEADLOCK! ***
> 
> The problem here is that callback registration takes the locks in one order
> whereas the CPU hotplug operations take the same locks in the opposite order.
> To avoid this issue and to provide a race-free method to register CPU hotplug
> callbacks (along with initialization of already online CPUs), introduce new
> variants of the callback registration APIs that simply register the callbacks
> without holding the cpu_add_remove_lock during the registration. That way,
> we can avoid the ABBA scenario. However, we will need to hold the
> cpu_add_remove_lock throughout the entire critical section, to protect updates
> to the callback/notifier chain.
> 
> This can be achieved by writing the callback registration code as follows:
> 
> 	cpu_maps_update_begin(); [ or cpu_notifier_register_begin(); see below ]
> 
> 	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> 		init_cpu(cpu);
> 
> 	/* This doesn't take the cpu_add_remove_lock */
> 	__register_cpu_notifier(&foobar_cpu_notifier);
> 
> 	cpu_maps_update_done();  [ or cpu_notifier_register_done(); see below ]
> 
> Note that we can't use get_online_cpus() here instead of cpu_maps_update_begin()
> because the cpu_hotplug.lock is dropped during the invocation of CPU_POST_DEAD
> notifiers, and hence get_online_cpus() cannot provide the necessary
> synchronization to protect the callback/notifier chains against concurrent
> reads and writes. On the other hand, since the cpu_add_remove_lock protects
> the entire hotplug operation (including CPU_POST_DEAD), we can use
> cpu_maps_update_begin/done() to guarantee proper synchronization.
> 
> Also, since cpu_maps_update_begin/done() is like a super-set of
> get/put_online_cpus(), the former naturally protects the critical sections
> from concurrent hotplug operations.
> 
> Since the names cpu_maps_update_begin/done() don't make much sense in CPU
> hotplug callback registration scenarios, we'll introduce new APIs named
> cpu_notifier_register_begin/done() and map them to cpu_maps_update_begin/done().
> 
> In summary, introduce the lockless variants of un/register_cpu_notifier() and
> also export the cpu_notifier_register_begin/done() APIs for use by modules.
> This way, we provide a race-free way to register hotplug callbacks as well as
> perform initialization for the CPUs that are already online.
> 
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

Reviewed-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>


--
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/