linux-kernel - RE: smp_call_function() friends and irq/bottom

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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <013801d3e8f0$c1f21820$45d64860$@lge.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 May 2018 15:24:46 +0900
From:   "Hoeun Ryu" <hoeun.ryu@....com>
To:     "'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "'Hoeun Ryu'" <hoeun.ryu@....com.com>
Cc:     <mingo@...nel.org>, <aaron.lu@...el.com>, <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        <frederic@...nel.org>, <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: smp_call_function() friends and irq/bottom_half context

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Zijlstra [mailto:peterz@...radead.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 7:17 PM
> To: ��ȣ�� <hoeun.ryu@....com>
> Cc: mingo@...nel.org; aaron.lu@...el.com; adobriyan@...il.com;
> frederic@...nel.org; ying.huang@...el.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: smp_call_function() friends and irq/bottom_half context
> 
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 01:58:29PM +0900, ��ȣ�� wrote:
> > Hi, all.
> >
> > I'm reading kernel/smp.c code and I found comments on smp_call_function()
> > and smp_call_function_[single/many]
> > saying that these functions are cannot be called in interrupt disabled
> > context or irq/bottom half handlers.
> >
> > I understand that there is a potential deadlock issue when caller CPU of
> > the functions is waiting for the completion of the callback of other
> CPUs.
> > But I was wondering if this is the case even when the caller CPU doesn't
> > wait for the completion (wait == 0).
> 
> IIRC yes, because csd_lock(). You can however use
> smp_call_function_single_async() with your own csd. Be very careful
> though, it is very easy to construct deadlocks.

Thank you for the explanation and the suggestion.

Would you please explain more on csd lock and irq disabled or irq/bh context ?
How can deadlocks happen when calling smp_call_function(wait=0) with irq disabled ?
How can deadlocks happen when calling smp_call_function(wait=0) from irq or bottom half context ?

I think it as 2d array like call_single_data[caller cpu][target cpu].flags.
csd_lock(csd[caller][target]) spins on the flag only when LOCKED is already set
which means that the caller CPU already called smp_call_function(wait=0)
and at the second calling of the function, the caller CPU spins on
csd_lock(csd[caller][target]) but the target CPU is still processing its callback list
(maybe processing other csd[other cpu][target]) and it does not yet process
csd[caller][target]. But the callback list will be finally flushed and LOCKED flags
is cleared of csd[caller][target] eventually ?