linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 13/70] locking/rwsem-xadd: Fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load

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: <20180917211650.297286017@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 18 Sep 2018 00:41:46 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Prateek Sood <prsood@...eaurora.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, dave@...olabs.net,
        longman@...hat.com, parri.andrea@...il.com, sramana@...eaurora.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 13/70] locking/rwsem-xadd: Fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load

4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Prateek Sood <prsood@...eaurora.org>

commit 9c29c31830a4eca724e137a9339137204bbb31be upstream.

If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
to wakeup being missed:

 spinning writer                  up_write caller
 ---------------                  -----------------------
 [S] osq_unlock()                 [L] osq
  spin_lock(wait_lock)
  sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
            +0xFFFFFFFF00000000
  count=sem->count
  MB
                                   sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
                                             -0xFFFFFFFF00000001
                                   spin_trylock(wait_lock)
                                   return
 rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
 spin_unlock(wait_lock)
 schedule()

Reordering of atomic_long_sub_return_release() in __up_write()
and rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can cause missing of
wakeup in up_write() context. In spinning writer, sem->count
and local variable count is 0XFFFFFFFE00000001. It would result
in rwsem_try_write_lock() failing to acquire rwsem and spinning
writer going to sleep in rwsem_down_write_failed().

The smp_rmb() will make sure that the spinner state is
consulted after sem->count is updated in up_write context.

Signed-off-by: Prateek Sood <prsood@...eaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: dave@...olabs.net
Cc: longman@...hat.com
Cc: parri.andrea@...il.com
Cc: sramana@...eaurora.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1504794658-15397-1-git-send-email-prsood@codeaurora.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -574,6 +574,33 @@ struct rw_semaphore *rwsem_wake(struct r
 	WAKE_Q(wake_q);
 
 	/*
+	* __rwsem_down_write_failed_common(sem)
+	*   rwsem_optimistic_spin(sem)
+	*     osq_unlock(sem->osq)
+	*   ...
+	*   atomic_long_add_return(&sem->count)
+	*
+	*      - VS -
+	*
+	*              __up_write()
+	*                if (atomic_long_sub_return_release(&sem->count) < 0)
+	*                  rwsem_wake(sem)
+	*                    osq_is_locked(&sem->osq)
+	*
+	* And __up_write() must observe !osq_is_locked() when it observes the
+	* atomic_long_add_return() in order to not miss a wakeup.
+	*
+	* This boils down to:
+	*
+	* [S.rel] X = 1                [RmW] r0 = (Y += 0)
+	*         MB                         RMB
+	* [RmW]   Y += 1               [L]   r1 = X
+	*
+	* exists (r0=1 /\ r1=0)
+	*/
+	smp_rmb();
+
+	/*
 	 * If a spinner is present, it is not necessary to do the wakeup.
 	 * Try to do wakeup only if the trylock succeeds to minimize
 	 * spinlock contention which may introduce too much delay in the