linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Deadlock via recursive wakeup via RCU with threadirqs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20190701094215.GR3402@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 1 Jul 2019 11:42:15 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Scott Wood <swood@...hat.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Deadlock via recursive wakeup via RCU with threadirqs

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:20:56AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 06:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 08:54:04AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Thank you!  Plus it looks like scheduler_ipi() takes an early exit if
> > > ->wake_list is empty, regardless of TIF_NEED_RESCHED, right?
> > 
> > Yes, TIF_NEED_RESCHED is checked in the interrupt return path.
> 
> OK, got it.  So the following sequence would be a valid way to get the
> scheduler's attention on the current CPU shortly after interrupts
> are re-enabled, even if the current CPU is already holding some
> rq or pi locks, correct?
> 
> 	set_tsk_need_resched(current);
> 	set_preempt_need_resched();
> 	smp_send_reschedule(smp_processor_id());

I'm not sure if smp_send_reschedule() can be used as self-IPI, some
hardware doesn't particularly like that IIRC. That is, hardware might
only have interfaces to IPI _other_ CPUs, but not self.

The normal scheduler code takes care to not call smp_send_reschedule()
to self.