linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] locking/rwsem: Add a new RWSEM_ANONYMOUSLY

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180516104829.GA24332@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 May 2018 12:48:30 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] locking/rwsem: Add a new RWSEM_ANONYMOUSLY_OWNED
 flag

On 05/15, Waiman Long wrote:
>
> There are use cases where a rwsem can be acquired by one task, but
> released by another task. In thess cases, optimistic spinning may need
> to be disabled.  One example will be the filesystem freeze/thaw code

You do not read my emails ;)

Let me repeat once again that in this particular case the writer will
never spin because of owner == NULL. freeze_super() checks SB_UNFROZEN
under sb->s_umount and only then calls sb_wait_write(). IOW, sb_wait_write()
can only be called when this rwsem was already released by the previous
writer.

I am not arguing with this change, percpu_rwsem_release/acquire may have
another user sometime, but the changelog is not accurate.

> +static inline bool is_rwsem_owner_spinnable(struct task_struct *owner)
>  {
> -	return owner && owner != RWSEM_READER_OWNED;
> +	return !((unsigned long)owner & RWSEM_ANONYMOUSLY_OWNED);
>  }

Perhaps you should add __attribute__(aligned) to struct rw_semaphore then...

I don't think it is really needed, but see the comment under struct address_space.

Oleg.