linux-kernel - Re: [BUG][tip/master] kernel panic while locking selftest at qspinlock

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150710130028.GI19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jul 2015 15:00:28 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>
Subject: Re: [BUG][tip/master] kernel panic while locking selftest at
 qspinlock_paravirt.h:137!

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 08:32:46PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:

>                     double unlock:
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> kernel BUG at /home/mhiramat/ksrc/linux-3/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h:137!

> Call Trace:
>  [<ffffffff81114a59>] __raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock+0x11/0x1e
>  [<ffffffff81117133>] ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0xfa/0x10c
>  [<ffffffff817cd3f7>] _raw_spin_unlock+0x44/0x64
>  [<ffffffff814603ee>] double_unlock_spin+0x3d/0x46

Cute, but somewhat expected. A double unlock really is a BUG and the PV
spinlock code cannot deal with it.

Do we want to make double unlock non-fatal unconditionally?

---
 kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
index 04ab18151cc8..172deeaf1311 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
@@ -286,15 +286,22 @@ __visible void __pv_queued_spin_unlock(struct qspinlock *lock)
 {
 	struct __qspinlock *l = (void *)lock;
 	struct pv_node *node;
+	u8 locked;
 
 	/*
 	 * We must not unlock if SLOW, because in that case we must first
 	 * unhash. Otherwise it would be possible to have multiple @lock
 	 * entries, which would be BAD.
 	 */
-	if (likely(cmpxchg(&l->locked, _Q_LOCKED_VAL, 0) == _Q_LOCKED_VAL))
+	locked = cmpxchg(&l->locked, _Q_LOCKED_VAL, 0);
+	if (likely(locked == _Q_LOCKED_VAL))
 		return;
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS
+	if (unlikely(!locked))
+		return;
+#endif
+
 	/*
 	 * Since the above failed to release, this must be the SLOW path.
 	 * Therefore start by looking up the blocked node and unhashing it.
--
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/