linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/2] rcu: Don't acquire lock in NMI handler in rcu_nmi_enter

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200313214752.GF3199@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date:   Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:47:52 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...com, mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
        oleg@...hat.com, "# 5 . 5 . x" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/2] rcu: Don't acquire lock in NMI
 handler in rcu_nmi_enter_common()

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 11:52:01PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 07:40:45PM -0700, paulmck@...nel.org wrote:
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > 
> > The rcu_nmi_enter_common() function can be invoked both in interrupt
> > and NMI handlers.  If it is invoked from process context (as opposed
> > to userspace or idle context) on a nohz_full CPU, it might acquire the
> > CPU's leaf rcu_node structure's ->lock.  Because this lock is held only
> > with interrupts disabled, this is safe from an interrupt handler, but
> > doing so from an NMI handler can result in self-deadlock.
> > 
> > This commit therefore adds "irq" to the "if" condition so as to only
> > acquire the ->lock from irq handlers or process context, never from
> > an NMI handler.
> 
> I think Peter's new lockdep changes for NMI would also catch this issue.
> 
> > 
> > Fixes: 5b14557b073c ("rcu: Avoid tick_dep_set_cpu() misordering")
> 
> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>

Applied, thank you!!!

							Thanx, Paul

> thanks,
> 
>  - Joel
> 
> 
> > Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 5.5.x
> > ---
> >  kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > index d3f52c3..f7d3e48 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > @@ -825,7 +825,7 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_nmi_enter_common(bool irq)
> >  			rcu_cleanup_after_idle();
> >  
> >  		incby = 1;
> > -	} else if (tick_nohz_full_cpu(rdp->cpu) &&
> > +	} else if (irq && tick_nohz_full_cpu(rdp->cpu) &&
> >  		   rdp->dynticks_nmi_nesting == DYNTICK_IRQ_NONIDLE &&
> >  		   READ_ONCE(rdp->rcu_urgent_qs) &&
> >  		   !READ_ONCE(rdp->rcu_forced_tick)) {
> > -- 
> > 2.9.5
> >