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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170925221848.6646-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2017 06:18:34 +0800
From:   Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Subject: [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v3 00/14] lockdep: Support deadlock detection for recursive read locks

Hi Ingo and Peter,

This is V3 for recursive read lock support in lockdep.

Changes since V2:

*	Add one revert patch for commit d82fed752942
	("locking/lockdep/selftests: Fix mixed read-write ABBA tests"),
	since we could handle recursive read lock correctly, so we don't
	need to fudge the test anymore.

*	More document and print-message changes for redefining
	LOCK*_STATE*.

*	Rewrite some commit logs to improve the explanation of the idea.

V1: https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150393341825453
V2: https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150468649417950


As Peter pointed out:

	https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150349072023540

The lockdep current has a limit support for recursive read locks, the
deadlock case as follow could not be detected:

	read_lock(A);
				lock(B);
	lock(B);
				write_lock(A);

I got some inspiration from Gautham R Shenoy:

	https://lwn.net/Articles/332801/

, and came up with this series.

The basic idea is:

*	Add recursive read locks into the graph

*	Classify dependencies into --(RR)-->, --(NR)-->, --(RN)-->,
	--(NN)-->, where R stands for recursive read lock, N stands for
	other locks(i.e. non-recursive read locks and write locks).

*	Define strong dependency paths as the paths of dependencies
	don't have two adjacent dependencies as --(*R)--> and --(R*)-->.

*	Extend __bfs() to only traverse on strong dependency paths.

*	If __bfs() finds a strong dependency circle, then a deadlock is
	reported.

The whole series is based on current master branch of tip tree:

	a35205980288 ("Merge branch 'WIP.x86/fpu'")

, and I also put it at:

	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/boqun/linux.git arr-rfc-v3

The whole series consists of 14 patches:

1.	Do a clean up on the return value of __bfs() and its friends.

2.	Make __bfs() able to visit every dependency until a match is
	found. The old version of __bfs() could only visit each lock
	class once, and this is insufficient if we are going to add
	recursive read locks into the dependency graph.

3.	Redefine LOCK*_STATE*, now LOCK*_STATE_RR stand for recursive
	read lock only and LOCK*_STATE stand for write lock and
	non-recursive read lock.

4-5	Extend __bfs() to be able to traverse the stong dependency
	patchs after recursive read locks added into the graph.

6-8	Adjust check_redundant(), check_noncircular() and
	check_irq_usage() with recursive read locks into consideration.

9.	Finally add recursive read locks into the dependency graph.

10-11	Adjust lock cache chain key generation with recursive read locks
	into consideration, and provide a test case.

12-13	Add more test cases.

14.	Revert commit d82fed752942 ("locking/lockdep/selftests: Fix
	mixed read-write ABBA tests"),

This series passed all the lockdep selftest cases(including those I
introduce). Will play more other tests, and in the meanwhile hope to
hear your thoughts about this.

Test and comments are welcome!

Regards,
Boqun

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ