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  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]
Date:	Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:07:33 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	paulus@...ba.org, oleg@...hat.com, mingo@...nel.org,
	rjw@...ysocki.net, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, peterz@...radead.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tj@...nel.org,
	walken@...gle.com, ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux@....linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/52] CPU hotplug: Fix issues with callback
 registration

On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 02:03:52 +0530 "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Many subsystems and drivers have the need to register CPU hotplug callbacks
> from their init routines and also perform initialization for the CPUs that are
> already online. But unfortunately there is no race-free way to achieve this
> today.
> 
> For example, consider this piece of code:
> 
> 	get_online_cpus();
> 
> 	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> 		init_cpu(cpu);
> 
> 	register_cpu_notifier(&foobar_cpu_notifier);
> 
> 	put_online_cpus();
> 
> This is not safe because there is a possibility of an ABBA deadlock involving
> the cpu_add_remove_lock and the cpu_hotplug.lock.
> 
>           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()]

Can't we fix this by using a different (ie: new) lock to protect
cpu_chain?

--
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