linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bpf: convert hashtab lock to raw lock

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: <56350A86.5090500@iogearbox.net>
Date:	Sat, 31 Oct 2015 19:37:58 +0100
From:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
CC:	Yang Shi <yang.shi@...aro.org>, ast@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: convert hashtab lock to raw lock

On 10/31/2015 02:47 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:03:58 -0700
> Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 03:16:26PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
>>> When running bpf samples on rt kernel, it reports the below warning:
>>>
>>> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:917
>>> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 128, pid: 477, name: ping
>>> Preemption disabled at:[<ffff80000017db58>] kprobe_perf_func+0x30/0x228
>> ...
>>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
>>> index 83c209d..972b76b 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
>>>   struct bpf_htab {
>>>   	struct bpf_map map;
>>>   	struct hlist_head *buckets;
>>> -	spinlock_t lock;
>>> +	raw_spinlock_t lock;
>>
>> How do we address such things in general?
>> I bet there are tons of places around the kernel that
>> call spin_lock from atomic.
>> I'd hate to lose the benefits of lockdep of non-raw spin_lock
>> just to make rt happy.
>
> You wont lose any benefits of lockdep. Lockdep still checks
> raw_spin_lock(). The only difference between raw_spin_lock and
> spin_lock is that in -rt spin_lock turns into an rt_mutex() and
> raw_spin_lock stays a spin lock.

( Btw, Yang, would have been nice if your commit description would have
   already included such info, not only that you convert it, but also why
   it's okay to do so. )

> The error is that in -rt, you called a mutex and not a spin lock while
> atomic.

You are right, I think this happens due to the preempt_disable() in the
trace_call_bpf() handler. So, I think the patch seems okay. The dep_map
is btw union'ed in the struct spinlock case to the same offset of the
dep_map from raw_spinlock.

It's a bit inconvenient, though, when we add other library code as maps
in future, f.e. things like rhashtable as they would first need to be
converted to raw_spinlock_t as well, but judging from the git log, it
looks like common practice.

Thanks,
Daniel
--
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/