linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] ACPI / scan: Acquire device_hotplug_lock in acpi_scan

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: <20190725135747.GB3582@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:57:47 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ACPI / scan: Acquire device_hotplug_lock in
 acpi_scan_init()

On Thu 25-07-19 15:05:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 25.07.19 14:56, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 24-07-19 16:30:17, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> We end up calling __add_memory() without the device hotplug lock held.
> >> (I used a local patch to assert in __add_memory() that the
> >>  device_hotplug_lock is held - I might upstream that as well soon)
> >>
> >> [   26.771684]        create_memory_block_devices+0xa4/0x140
> >> [   26.772952]        add_memory_resource+0xde/0x200
> >> [   26.773987]        __add_memory+0x6e/0xa0
> >> [   26.775161]        acpi_memory_device_add+0x149/0x2b0
> >> [   26.776263]        acpi_bus_attach+0xf1/0x1f0
> >> [   26.777247]        acpi_bus_attach+0x66/0x1f0
> >> [   26.778268]        acpi_bus_attach+0x66/0x1f0
> >> [   26.779073]        acpi_bus_attach+0x66/0x1f0
> >> [   26.780143]        acpi_bus_scan+0x3e/0x90
> >> [   26.780844]        acpi_scan_init+0x109/0x257
> >> [   26.781638]        acpi_init+0x2ab/0x30d
> >> [   26.782248]        do_one_initcall+0x58/0x2cf
> >> [   26.783181]        kernel_init_freeable+0x1bd/0x247
> >> [   26.784345]        kernel_init+0x5/0xf1
> >> [   26.785314]        ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50
> >>
> >> So perform the locking just like in acpi_device_hotplug().
> > 
> > While playing with the device_hotplug_lock, can we actually document
> > what it is protecting please? I have a bad feeling that we are adding
> > this lock just because some other code path does rather than with a good
> > idea why it is needed. This patch just confirms that. What exactly does
> > the lock protect from here in an early boot stage.
> 
> We have plenty of documentation already
> 
> mm/memory_hotplug.c
> 
> git grep -C5 device_hotplug mm/memory_hotplug.c
> 
> Also see
> 
> Documentation/core-api/memory-hotplug.rst

OK, fair enough. I was more pointing to a documentation right there
where the lock is declared because that is the place where people
usually check for documentation. The core-api documentation looks quite
nice. And based on that doc it seems that this patch is actually not
needed because neither the online/offline or cpu hotplug should be
possible that early unless I am missing something.

> Regarding the early stage: primarily lockdep as I mentioned.

Could you add a lockdep splat that would be fixed by this patch to the
changelog for reference?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs