| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20180411185730.GU3948@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:57:30 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC tip/locking/lockdep v6 19/20] rcu: Equip sleepable RCU with
lockdep dependency graph checks
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 09:56:44PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> Although all flavors of RCU are annotated correctly with lockdep
> annotations as recursive read locks, the 'check' parameter for their
> calls to lock_acquire() is unset. Which means RCU read locks are not
> added into the lockdep dependency graph. This is fine for all flavors
> except sleepable RCU, because the deadlock scenarios for them are
> simple: calling synchronize_rcu() and its friends inside their read-side
> critical sections. But for sleepable RCU, as there may be multiple
> instances with multiple classes, there are more deadlock cases.
> Considering the following:
>
> TASK 1 TASK 2
> ======= ========
> i = srcu_read_lock(&sa); i = srcu_read_lock(&sb);
> synchronize_srcu(&sb); synchronize_srcu(&sa);
> srcu_read_unlock(&sa); srcu_read_unlock(&sb);
>
> Neither TASK 1 or 2 could go out of the read-side critical sections,
> because they are waiting for each other at synchronize_srcu().
>
> With the new improvement for lockdep, which allows us to detect
> deadlocks for recursive read locks, we can actually detect this. What we
> need to do are simply: a) mark srcu_read_{,un}lock() as 'check'
> lock_acquire() and b) annotate synchronize_srcu() as a empty
> grab-and-drop for a write lock (because synchronize_srcu() will wait for
> previous srcu_read_lock() to release, and won't block the next
> srcu_read_lock(), just like a empty write lock section).
>
> This patch adds those to allow we check deadlocks related to sleepable
> RCU with lockdep.
>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Very cool!
One question though... Won't this report a false-positive self-deadlock if
srcu_read_lock() is invoked from an interrupt handler?
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> include/linux/srcu.h | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> kernel/rcu/srcutiny.c | 2 ++
> kernel/rcu/srcutree.c | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/srcu.h b/include/linux/srcu.h
> index 33c1c698df09..23f397bd192c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/srcu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/srcu.h
> @@ -99,6 +99,49 @@ static inline int srcu_read_lock_held(const struct srcu_struct *sp)
> return lock_is_held(&sp->dep_map);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * lockdep annotations for srcu_read_{un,}lock, and synchronize_srcu():
> + *
> + * srcu_read_lock() and srcu_read_unlock() are similar to rcu_read_lock() and
> + * rcu_read_unlock(), they are recursive read locks. But we mark them as
> + * "check", they will be added into lockdep dependency graph for deadlock
> + * detection. And we also annotate synchronize_srcu() as a
> + * write_lock()+write_unlock(), because synchronize_srcu() will wait for any
> + * corresponding previous srcu_read_lock() to release, and that acts like a
> + * empty grab-and-drop write lock.
> + *
> + * We do so because multiple sleepable rcu instances may cause deadlock as
> + * follow:
> + *
> + * Task 1:
> + * ia = srcu_read_lock(&srcu_A);
> + * synchronize_srcu(&srcu_B);
> + * srcu_read_unlock(&srcu_A, ia);
> + *
> + * Task 2:
> + * ib = srcu_read_lock(&srcu_B);
> + * synchronize_srcu(&srcu_A);
> + * srcu_read_unlock(&srcu_B, ib);
> + *
> + * And we want lockdep to detect this or more complicated deadlock with SRCU
> + * involved.
> + */
> +static inline void srcu_lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *map)
> +{
> + lock_map_acquire_read(map);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void srcu_lock_release(struct lockdep_map *map)
> +{
> + lock_map_release(map);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void srcu_lock_sync(struct lockdep_map *map)
> +{
> + lock_map_acquire(map);
> + lock_map_release(map);
> +}
> +
> #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC */
>
> static inline int srcu_read_lock_held(const struct srcu_struct *sp)
> @@ -106,6 +149,10 @@ static inline int srcu_read_lock_held(const struct srcu_struct *sp)
> return 1;
> }
>
> +#define srcu_lock_acquire(m) do { } while (0)
> +#define srcu_lock_release(m) do { } while (0)
> +#define srcu_lock_sync(m) do { } while (0)
> +
> #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC */
>
> /**
> @@ -157,7 +204,7 @@ static inline int srcu_read_lock(struct srcu_struct *sp) __acquires(sp)
> int retval;
>
> retval = __srcu_read_lock(sp);
> - rcu_lock_acquire(&(sp)->dep_map);
> + srcu_lock_acquire(&(sp)->dep_map);
> return retval;
> }
>
> @@ -171,7 +218,7 @@ static inline int srcu_read_lock(struct srcu_struct *sp) __acquires(sp)
> static inline void srcu_read_unlock(struct srcu_struct *sp, int idx)
> __releases(sp)
> {
> - rcu_lock_release(&(sp)->dep_map);
> + srcu_lock_release(&(sp)->dep_map);
> __srcu_read_unlock(sp, idx);
> }
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutiny.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutiny.c
> index 76ac5f50b2c7..bc89cb48d800 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutiny.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutiny.c
> @@ -188,6 +188,8 @@ void synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp)
> {
> struct rcu_synchronize rs;
>
> + srcu_lock_sync(&sp->dep_map);
> +
> init_rcu_head_on_stack(&rs.head);
> init_completion(&rs.completion);
> call_srcu(sp, &rs.head, wakeme_after_rcu);
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> index d5cea81378cc..e2628e9275b9 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> @@ -997,6 +997,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_srcu_expedited);
> */
> void synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp)
> {
> + srcu_lock_sync(&sp->dep_map);
> +
> if (srcu_might_be_idle(sp) || rcu_gp_is_expedited())
> synchronize_srcu_expedited(sp);
> else
> --
> 2.16.2
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists