linux-kernel - Re: slub/debugobjects: lockup when freeing memory

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: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1406201015440.5170@nanos>
Date:	Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:17:32 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: slub/debugobjects: lockup when freeing memory

On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:32:41PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:37:17PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:29:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > Well, no. Look at the callchain:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > __call_rcu
> > > > > >     debug_object_activate
> > > > > >        rcuhead_fixup_activate
> > > > > >           debug_object_init
> > > > > >               kmem_cache_alloc
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > So call rcu activates the object, but the object has no reference in
> > > > > > the debug objects code so the fixup code is called which inits the
> > > > > > object and allocates a reference ....
> > > > > 
> > > > > OK, got it.  And you are right, call_rcu() has done this for a very
> > > > > long time, so not sure what changed.  But it seems like the right
> > > > > approach is to provide a debug-object-free call_rcu_alloc() for use
> > > > > by the memory allocators.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Seem reasonable?  If so, please see the following patch.
> > > > 
> > > > Not really, you're torpedoing the whole purpose of debugobjects :)
> > > > 
> > > > So, why can't we just init the rcu head when the stuff is created?
> > > 
> > > That would allow me to keep my code unchanged, so I am in favor.  ;-)
> > 
> > Almost unchanged. You need to provide a function to do so, i.e. make
> > use of
> > 
> >     debug_init_rcu_head()
> 
> You mean like this?

I'd rather name it init_rcu_head() and free_rcu_head() w/o the debug_
prefix, so it's consistent with init_rcu_head_on_stack /
destroy_rcu_head_on_stack. But either way works for me.

Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

 
--
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/