linux-kernel - Re: Possible use of RCU while in extended QS: idle vs RCU read-side in interrupt vs rcu_eqs

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: <600900741.1177.1547140315581.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 12:11:55 -0500 (EST)
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:     rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: Possible use of RCU while in extended QS: idle vs RCU read-side
 in interrupt vs rcu_eqs_exit

----- On Jan 10, 2019, at 8:44 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com wrote:

> ----- On Jan 10, 2019, at 8:08 AM, rostedt rostedt@...dmis.org wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 20:38:51 -0500 (EST)
>> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Paul,
>>> 
>>> I've had a user report that trace_sched_waking() appears to be
>>> invoked while !rcu_is_watching() in some situation, so I started
>>> digging into the scheduler idle code.
>> 
>> I'm wondering if this isn't a bug. Do you have the backtrace for where
>> trace_sched_waking() was called without rcu watching?
> 
> I strongly suspect a bug as well. I'm awaiting a reproducer from the
> user whom reported this issue so I can add a WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_is_watching())
> in the scheduler code near trace_sched_waking() and gather a backtrace.
> 
> It still has to be confirmed, but I suspect this have been triggered
> within a HyperV guest. It may therefore be related to a virtualized environment.
> 
> I'll try to ask more specifically on which environment this was encountered.

So it ends up it happens directly on hardware on a Linux laptop. Here is
the stacktrace:

vmlinux!try_to_wake_up
vmlinux!default_wake_function
vmlinux!pollwake
vmlinux!__wake_up_common
vmlinux!__wake_up_common_lock
vmlinux!__wake_up
vmlinux!perf_event_wakeup
vmlinux!perf_pending_event
vmlinux!irq_work_run_list
vmlinux!irq_work_run
vmlinux!smp_irq_work_iterrupt
vmlinux!irq_work_interrupt
vmlinux!finish_task_switch
vmlinux!__schedule
vmlinux!schedule_idle
vmlinux!do_idle
vmlinux!cpu_startup_entry
vmlinux!start_secondary
vmlinux!secondary_startup_64

Does it raise any red flag ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mathieu
> 
>> 
>> -- Steve
>> 
>>> 
>>> It appears that interrupts are re-enabled before rcu_eqs_exit() is
>>> invoked when exiting idle code from the scheduler.
>>> 
>>> I wonder what happens if an interrupt handler (including scheduler code)
>>> happens to issue a RCU read-side critical section before rcu_eqs_exit()
>>> is called ? Is there some code on interrupt entry that ensures rcu eqs
>>> state is exited in such scenario ?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Mathieu
> 
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com