[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171101151355.GG20040@pathway.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 16:13:55 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc: jpoimboe@...hat.com, jeyu@...nel.org, jikos@...nel.org,
lpechacek@...e.cz, pavel@....cz, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] livepatch: send a fake signal to all blocking
tasks
On Tue 2017-10-31 12:48:52, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> Live patching consistency model is of LEAVE_PATCHED_SET and
> SWITCH_THREAD. This means that all tasks in the system have to be marked
> one by one as safe to call a new patched function. Safe means when a
> task is not (sleeping) in a set of patched functions. That is, no
> patched function is on the task's stack. Another clearly safe place is
> the boundary between kernel and userspace. The patching waits for all
> tasks to get outside of the patched set or to cross the boundary. The
> transition is completed afterwards.
>
> The problem is that a task can block the transition for quite a long
> time, if not forever. It could sleep in a set of patched functions, for
> example. Luckily we can force the task to leave the set by sending it a
> fake signal, that is a signal with no data in signal pending structures
> (no handler, no sign of proper signal delivered). Suspend/freezer use
> this to freeze the tasks as well. The task gets TIF_SIGPENDING set and
> is woken up (if it has been sleeping in the kernel before) or kicked by
> rescheduling IPI (if it was running on other CPU). This causes the task
> to go to kernel/userspace boundary where the signal would be handled and
> the task would be marked as safe in terms of live patching.
>
> diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> index b004a1fb6032..6700d3b22615 100644
> --- a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> @@ -577,3 +577,43 @@ void klp_copy_process(struct task_struct *child)
>
> /* TIF_PATCH_PENDING gets copied in setup_thread_stack() */
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * Sends a fake signal to all non-kthread tasks with TIF_PATCH_PENDING set.
> + * Kthreads with TIF_PATCH_PENDING set are woken up. Only admin can request this
> + * action currently.
> + */
> +void klp_force_signals(void)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *g, *task;
> +
> + pr_notice("signaling remaining tasks\n");
> +
> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + for_each_process_thread(g, task) {
> + if (!klp_patch_pending(task))
> + continue;
> +
> + /*
> + * There is a small race here. We could see TIF_PATCH_PENDING
> + * set and decide to wake up a kthread or send a fake signal.
> + * Meanwhile the task could migrate itself and the action
> + * would be meaningless. It is not serious though.
> + */
> + if (task->flags & PF_KTHREAD) {
> + /*
> + * Wake up a kthread which still has not been migrated.
> + */
> + wake_up_process(task);
I have just noticed that freezer used wake_up_state(p, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
IMHO, we should do so as well.
wake_up_process() wakes also tasks in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state.
These might not be ready for an unexpected wakeup. For example,
see concat_dev_erase() in drivers/mtd/mtdcontact.c.
With this change, feel free to use
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists