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  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:   Wed, 16 Aug 2017 17:40:33 +0200
From:   Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Artem Savkov <asavkov@...hat.com>
Cc:     paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: possible circular locking dependency
 mmap_sem/cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem

On 16/08/2017 17:36, Artem Savkov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 03:39:14PM +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> On 15/08/2017 21:01, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 04:09:47PM +0200, Artem Savkov wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> After commit fc8dffd "cpu/hotplug: Convert hotplug locking to percpu rwsem"
>>>> the following lockdep splat started showing up on some systems while running
>>>> ltp's madvise06 test (right after first dirty_pages call [1]).
>>>
>>> Hello, Artem,
>>>
>>> Have you tried running this with Laurent Dufour's speculative page-fault
>>> patch set?  https://lwn.net/Articles/730160/
>>
>> Hello Artem, Hello Paul,
>>
>> This would be a good idea to give it a try, but I don't think this will
>> help here as the speculative page fault handler is aborted if vma->ops is
>> set as it is the case in the following stack trace of the CPU #0.
>>
>> This being said, the speculative page fault handler may also failed due to
>> VMA's changes occurring in our back. In such a case, the legacy page fault
>> handler is then tried and such a lock dependency is expected to raise again.
> 
> I've tried with the patch set on top of rc5 and the warning is intact
> except for cpu_hotplug_lock path having an extra call to
> handle_pte_fault() between handle_mm_fault() and __do_fault().

This is because now handle_pte_fault() is no more inlined in
handle_mm_fault() as it may also be called by handle_speculative_fault().

> 
> [   32.036924] -> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++++}:
> [   32.037628]        __lock_acquire+0x153c/0x1550
> [   32.038231]        lock_acquire+0xc9/0x230
> [   32.038740]        cpus_read_lock+0x4b/0x90
> [   32.039292]        drain_all_stock.part.33+0x18/0x140
> [   32.039815]        try_charge+0x3ab/0x6e0
> [   32.040273]        mem_cgroup_try_charge+0x82/0x330
> [   32.040845]        shmem_getpage_gfp+0x268/0x1050
> [   32.041421]        shmem_fault+0x96/0x200
> [   32.041955]        __do_fault+0x1e/0xa0
> [   32.042354]        handle_pte_fault+0x4bd/0x980
> [   32.042923]        __handle_mm_fault+0x21b/0x520
> [   32.043497]        handle_mm_fault+0x16e/0x380
> [   32.044070]        __do_page_fault+0x3fe/0x5a0
> [   32.044532]        do_page_fault+0x30/0x80
> [   32.045004]        page_fault+0x28/0x30
> 
> 
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Laurent.
>>
>>>
>>>> [1] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/testcases/kernel/syscalls/madvise/madvise06.c#L136
>>>>
>>>> [21002.630252] ======================================================
>>>> [21002.637148] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>>>> [21002.644045] 4.13.0-rc3-next-20170807 #12 Not tainted
>>>> [21002.649583] ------------------------------------------------------
>>>> [21002.656492] a.out/4771 is trying to acquire lock:
>>>> [21002.661742]  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff812b4668>] drain_all_stock.part.35+0x18/0x140
>>>> [21002.672629] 
>>>> [21002.672629] but task is already holding lock:
>>>> [21002.679137]  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff8106eb35>] __do_page_fault+0x175/0x530
>>>> [21002.688371] 
>>>> [21002.688371] which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>>> [21002.688371] 
>>>> [21002.697505] 
>>>> [21002.697505] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>>>> [21002.705856] 
>>>> [21002.705856] -> #3 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
>>>> [21002.712080]        lock_acquire+0xc9/0x230
>>>> [21002.716661]        __might_fault+0x70/0xa0
>>>> [21002.721241]        _copy_to_user+0x23/0x70
>>>> [21002.725814]        filldir+0xa7/0x110
>>>> [21002.729988]        xfs_dir2_sf_getdents.isra.10+0x20c/0x2c0 [xfs]
>>>> [21002.736840]        xfs_readdir+0x1fa/0x2c0 [xfs]
>>>> [21002.742042]        xfs_file_readdir+0x30/0x40 [xfs]
>>>> [21002.747485]        iterate_dir+0x17a/0x1a0
>>>> [21002.752057]        SyS_getdents+0xb0/0x160
>>>> [21002.756638]        entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1f/0xbe
>>>> [21002.762371] 
>>>> [21002.762371] -> #2 (&type->i_mutex_dir_key#3){++++++}:
>>>> [21002.769661]        lock_acquire+0xc9/0x230
>>>> [21002.774239]        down_read+0x51/0xb0
>>>> [21002.778429]        lookup_slow+0xde/0x210
>>>> [21002.782903]        walk_component+0x160/0x250
>>>> [21002.787765]        link_path_walk+0x1a6/0x610
>>>> [21002.792625]        path_openat+0xe4/0xd50
>>>> [21002.797100]        do_filp_open+0x91/0x100
>>>> [21002.801673]        file_open_name+0xf5/0x130
>>>> [21002.806429]        filp_open+0x33/0x50
>>>> [21002.810620]        kernel_read_file_from_path+0x39/0x80
>>>> [21002.816459]        _request_firmware+0x39f/0x880
>>>> [21002.821610]        request_firmware_direct+0x37/0x50
>>>> [21002.827151]        request_microcode_fw+0x64/0xe0
>>>> [21002.832401]        reload_store+0xf7/0x180
>>>> [21002.836974]        dev_attr_store+0x18/0x30
>>>> [21002.841641]        sysfs_kf_write+0x44/0x60
>>>> [21002.846318]        kernfs_fop_write+0x113/0x1a0
>>>> [21002.851374]        __vfs_write+0x37/0x170
>>>> [21002.855849]        vfs_write+0xc7/0x1c0
>>>> [21002.860128]        SyS_write+0x58/0xc0
>>>> [21002.864313]        do_syscall_64+0x6c/0x1f0
>>>> [21002.868973]        return_from_SYSCALL_64+0x0/0x7a
>>>> [21002.874317] 
>>>> [21002.874317] -> #1 (microcode_mutex){+.+.+.}:
>>>> [21002.880748]        lock_acquire+0xc9/0x230
>>>> [21002.885322]        __mutex_lock+0x88/0x960
>>>> [21002.889894]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
>>>> [21002.894854]        microcode_init+0xbb/0x208
>>>> [21002.899617]        do_one_initcall+0x51/0x1a9
>>>> [21002.904481]        kernel_init_freeable+0x208/0x2a7
>>>> [21002.909922]        kernel_init+0xe/0x104
>>>> [21002.914298]        ret_from_fork+0x2a/0x40
>>>> [21002.918867] 
>>>> [21002.918867] -> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++++}:
>>>> [21002.926058]        __lock_acquire+0x153c/0x1550
>>>> [21002.931112]        lock_acquire+0xc9/0x230
>>>> [21002.935688]        cpus_read_lock+0x4b/0x90
>>>> [21002.940353]        drain_all_stock.part.35+0x18/0x140
>>>> [21002.945987]        try_charge+0x3ab/0x6e0
>>>> [21002.950460]        mem_cgroup_try_charge+0x7f/0x2c0
>>>> [21002.955902]        shmem_getpage_gfp+0x25f/0x1050
>>>> [21002.961149]        shmem_fault+0x96/0x200
>>>> [21002.965621]        __do_fault+0x1e/0xa0
>>>> [21002.969905]        __handle_mm_fault+0x9c3/0xe00
>>>> [21002.975056]        handle_mm_fault+0x16e/0x380
>>>> [21002.980013]        __do_page_fault+0x24a/0x530
>>>> [21002.984968]        do_page_fault+0x30/0x80
>>>> [21002.989537]        page_fault+0x28/0x30
>>>> [21002.993812] 
>>>> [21002.993812] other info that might help us debug this:
>>>> [21002.993812] 
>>>> [21003.002744] Chain exists of:
>>>> [21003.002744]   cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem --> &type->i_mutex_dir_key#3 --> &mm->mmap_sem
>>>> [21003.002744] 
>>>> [21003.016238]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>>> [21003.016238] 
>>>> [21003.022843]        CPU0                    CPU1
>>>> [21003.027896]        ----                    ----
>>>> [21003.032948]   lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>>>> [21003.036741]                                lock(&type->i_mutex_dir_key#3);
>>>> [21003.044419]                                lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>>>> [21003.051025]   lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
>>>> [21003.055788] 
>>>> [21003.055788]  *** DEADLOCK ***
>>>> [21003.055788] 
>>>> [21003.062393] 2 locks held by a.out/4771:
>>>> [21003.066675]  #0:  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff8106eb35>] __do_page_fault+0x175/0x530
>>>> [21003.076391]  #1:  (percpu_charge_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812b4c97>] try_charge+0x397/0x6e0
>>>> [21003.086198] 
>>>> [21003.086198] stack backtrace:
>>>> [21003.091059] CPU: 6 PID: 4771 Comm: a.out Not tainted 4.13.0-rc3-next-20170807 #12
>>>> [21003.099409] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge M520/0DW6GX, BIOS 2.4.2 02/03/2015
>>>> [21003.107766] Call Trace:
>>>> [21003.110495]  dump_stack+0x85/0xc9
>>>> [21003.114190]  print_circular_bug+0x1f9/0x207
>>>> [21003.118854]  __lock_acquire+0x153c/0x1550
>>>> [21003.123327]  lock_acquire+0xc9/0x230
>>>> [21003.127313]  ? drain_all_stock.part.35+0x18/0x140
>>>> [21003.132563]  cpus_read_lock+0x4b/0x90
>>>> [21003.136652]  ? drain_all_stock.part.35+0x18/0x140
>>>> [21003.141900]  drain_all_stock.part.35+0x18/0x140
>>>> [21003.146954]  try_charge+0x3ab/0x6e0
>>>> [21003.150846]  mem_cgroup_try_charge+0x7f/0x2c0
>>>> [21003.155705]  shmem_getpage_gfp+0x25f/0x1050
>>>> [21003.160374]  shmem_fault+0x96/0x200
>>>> [21003.164263]  ? __lock_acquire+0x2fb/0x1550
>>>> [21003.168832]  ? __lock_acquire+0x2fb/0x1550
>>>> [21003.173402]  __do_fault+0x1e/0xa0
>>>> [21003.177097]  __handle_mm_fault+0x9c3/0xe00
>>>> [21003.181669]  handle_mm_fault+0x16e/0x380
>>>> [21003.186045]  ? handle_mm_fault+0x49/0x380
>>>> [21003.190518]  __do_page_fault+0x24a/0x530
>>>> [21003.194895]  do_page_fault+0x30/0x80
>>>> [21003.198883]  page_fault+0x28/0x30
>>>> [21003.202593] RIP: 0033:0x400886
>>>> [21003.205998] RSP: 002b:00007fff81d84d20 EFLAGS: 00010206
>>>> [21003.211827] RAX: 00007fc763bb7000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000001000
>>>> [21003.219789] RDX: 0000000006362000 RSI: 0000000019000000 RDI: 00007fc75d855000
>>>> [21003.227751] RBP: 00007fff81d84d50 R08: ffffffffffffffff R09: 0000000000000000
>>>> [21003.235713] R10: 00007fff81d84a30 R11: 00007fc7769445d0 R12: 0000000000400750
>>>> [21003.243681] R13: 00007fff81d84f70 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Regards,
>>>>   Artem
>>>>
>>
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists