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]
Date:	Fri,  4 Sep 2015 14:11:30 +0200
From:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] rcu: Fix up timeouts for forcing the quiescent state

The deadline to force the quiescent state (jiffies_force_qs) is currently
updated only when the previous timeout passed. But the timeout used for
wait_event() is always the entire original timeout. This is strange.

First, we might miss the deadline if we wait after a spurious wake up
or after sleeping in cond_resched() because we wait too long.

Second, we might do another forcing too early if the previous forcing
was done earlier because of RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS and we later get a spurious
wake up. IMHO, we should reset the deadline in this case.

This patch updates the deadline "jiffies_force_qs" right after forcing
the quiescent state by rcu_gp_fqs().

Also it updates the remaining timeout according to the current jiffies and
the requested deadline.

It moves the cond_resched_rcu_qs() to a single place. It changes the order
of the check for the pending signal. But there never should be a pending
signal. If there was we would have bigger problems because wait_event()
would never sleep again until someone flushed the signal.

I have found these problems when trying to understand the code. I do not
have any reproducer. I think that it is hardly visible because
the spurious wakeup is rather theoretical.

Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 54af8d5f9f7b..aaeeabcba545 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -2035,13 +2035,45 @@ static void rcu_gp_cleanup(struct rcu_state *rsp)
 }
 
 /*
+ * Normalize, update, and return the first timeout.
+ */
+static unsigned long normalize_jiffies_till_first_fqs(void)
+{
+	unsigned long j = jiffies_till_first_fqs;
+
+	if (unlikely(j > HZ)) {
+		j = HZ;
+		jiffies_till_first_fqs = HZ;
+	}
+
+	return j;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Normalize, update, and return the first timeout.
+ */
+static unsigned long normalize_jiffies_till_next_fqs(void)
+{
+	unsigned long j = jiffies_till_next_fqs;
+
+	if (unlikely(j > HZ)) {
+		j = HZ;
+		jiffies_till_next_fqs = HZ;
+	} else if (unlikely(j < 1)) {
+		j = 1;
+		jiffies_till_next_fqs = 1;
+	}
+
+	return j;
+}
+
+/*
  * Body of kthread that handles grace periods.
  */
 static int __noreturn rcu_gp_kthread(void *arg)
 {
 	int gf;
-	unsigned long j;
-	int ret;
+	unsigned long timeout, j;
 	struct rcu_state *rsp = arg;
 	struct rcu_node *rnp = rcu_get_root(rsp);
 
@@ -2071,22 +2103,18 @@ static int __noreturn rcu_gp_kthread(void *arg)
 
 		/* Handle quiescent-state forcing. */
 		rsp->fqs_state = RCU_SAVE_DYNTICK;
-		j = jiffies_till_first_fqs;
-		if (j > HZ) {
-			j = HZ;
-			jiffies_till_first_fqs = HZ;
-		}
-		ret = 0;
+		timeout = normalize_jiffies_till_first_fqs();
+		rsp->jiffies_force_qs = jiffies + timeout;
 		for (;;) {
-			if (!ret)
-				rsp->jiffies_force_qs = jiffies + j;
 			trace_rcu_grace_period(rsp->name,
 					       READ_ONCE(rsp->gpnum),
 					       TPS("fqswait"));
 			rsp->gp_state = RCU_GP_WAIT_FQS;
-			ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(rsp->gp_wq,
-					rcu_gp_fqs_check_wake(rsp, &gf), j);
+			wait_event_interruptible_timeout(rsp->gp_wq,
+					rcu_gp_fqs_check_wake(rsp, &gf),
+					timeout);
 			rsp->gp_state = RCU_GP_DOING_FQS;
+try_again:
 			/* Locking provides needed memory barriers. */
 			/* If grace period done, leave loop. */
 			if (!READ_ONCE(rnp->qsmask) &&
@@ -2099,28 +2127,29 @@ static int __noreturn rcu_gp_kthread(void *arg)
 						       READ_ONCE(rsp->gpnum),
 						       TPS("fqsstart"));
 				rcu_gp_fqs(rsp);
+				timeout = normalize_jiffies_till_next_fqs();
+				rsp->jiffies_force_qs = jiffies + timeout;
 				trace_rcu_grace_period(rsp->name,
 						       READ_ONCE(rsp->gpnum),
 						       TPS("fqsend"));
-				cond_resched_rcu_qs();
-				WRITE_ONCE(rsp->gp_activity, jiffies);
 			} else {
 				/* Deal with stray signal. */
-				cond_resched_rcu_qs();
-				WRITE_ONCE(rsp->gp_activity, jiffies);
 				WARN_ON(signal_pending(current));
 				trace_rcu_grace_period(rsp->name,
 						       READ_ONCE(rsp->gpnum),
 						       TPS("fqswaitsig"));
 			}
-			j = jiffies_till_next_fqs;
-			if (j > HZ) {
-				j = HZ;
-				jiffies_till_next_fqs = HZ;
-			} else if (j < 1) {
-				j = 1;
-				jiffies_till_next_fqs = 1;
-			}
+			cond_resched_rcu_qs();
+			WRITE_ONCE(rsp->gp_activity, jiffies);
+			/*
+			 * Count the remaining timeout when it was a spurious
+			 * wakeup. Well, it is useful also when we have slept
+			 * in the cond_resched().
+			 */
+			j = jiffies;
+			if (ULONG_CMP_GE(j, rsp->jiffies_force_qs))
+				goto try_again;
+			timeout = rsp->jiffies_force_qs - j;
 		}
 
 		/* Handle grace-period end. */
-- 
1.8.5.6

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ