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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:28:41 +0200
From:   Noa Osherovich <noaos@...lanox.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC:     <sagi@...mberg.me>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Majd Dibbiny <majd@...lanox.com>, <tj@...nel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Poll CQ syncing problem

On 3/1/2017 4:51 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 04:30:26PM +0200, Noa Osherovich wrote:
>> Analysis:
>> Since ib_comp_wq isn't single threaded, two works can run in parallel for the same CQ,
>> executing __ib_process_cq.
> They shouldn't.  Each CQ has a single work_struct, and any given work_struct
> should only be executing at once:
>
> "Note that the flag ``WQ_NON_REENTRANT`` no longer exists as all
> workqueues are now non-reentrant - any work item is guaranteed to be
> executed by at most one worker system-wide at any given time."
>
>> Since this function isn't thread safe and the wc array is shared, it causes a data corruption
>> which eventually crashes in the MAD layer due to a double list_del of the same element.
> This should not be the case.  What kernel version are you testing and does
> it contain any patches touching core kernel code?

Thanks Christoph for the quick response.

Currently we see this only in old kernels. I'll investigate this more and update.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ