linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu] Eliminate deadlock between CPU hotplug and expedited grace periods

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: <20140903150306.GU5001@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 3 Sep 2014 08:03:06 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
	josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com,
	<""@rjwysocki.net>, tianyu.lan@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu] Eliminate deadlock between CPU hotplug
 and expedited grace periods

On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 01:31:12PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 09:36:56AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 06:17:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 09:05:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > URGH.. I really hate that. The hotplug interface is already too
> > > > > horrible, we should not add such hacks to it.
> > > > 
> > > > We do have try_ interfaces to a number of other subsystems, so I don't
> > > > believe that it qualifies as such a hack.
> > > 
> > > We do indeed, but I'm not sure about adding this to the hotplug stuff.
> > 
> > Looks pretty straightforward to me.
> > 
> > > Also; not really understanding the problem doesn't help. 
> > 
> > The current implementation of synchronize_sched_expedited()
> > calls get_online_cpus().  Some of the ACPI code needs to hold the
> > acpi_ioremap_lock mutex across synchronize_sched_expedited(), and
> > also needs to acquire this same mutex from a CPU hotplug notifier.
> > This results in deadlock between the cpu_hotplug.lock mutex and the
> > acpi_ioremap_lock mutex.
> 
> 
>   acpi_ioremap_lock			cpu_hotplug_begin()
>     synchronize_sched()			  acpi_ioremap_lock
>       get_online_cpus()
> 
> So yes, AB-BA.
> 
> > Normal RCU grace periods avoid this by synchronizing on a lock acquired by
> > the RCU CPU-hotplug notifiers, but this does not work for the expedited
> > grace periods because the outgoing CPU can be running random tasks for
> > quite some time after RCU's notifier executes.  So the fix is just to
> > drop back to a normal grace period when there is a CPU-hotplug operation
> > in progress.
> 
> So why are we 'normally' doing an expedited call here anyhow? 

Presumably because they set either the boot parameter or
the sysfs variable that causes synchronize_sched() to so
synchronize_sched_expedited().

> > > > > How about ripping that rcu_expedited stuff out instead? That's all
> > > > > conditional anyhow, so might as well not do it.
> > > > 
> > > > In what way is the expedited stuff conditional?
> > > 
> > > synchronize_sched() conditionally calls synchronize_sched_expedited()
> > > and its condition: rcu_expedited, gets set/cleared on pm notifiers and
> > > nr_cpu_ids.
> > 
> > There are also direct calls to both synchronize_sched_expedited() and
> > synchronize_rcu_expedited().
> 
> But those are not within hotplug bits. Also weren't we removing them? I
> thought we didn't appreciate spraying IPIs like they do?

I hadn't heard anything about removing them, but making the
expedited primitives a bit less IPI-happy is on my list.

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/