| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20200402155406.GP19865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 08:54:06 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
tglx@...utronix.de,
"James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com"
<James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>, deller@....de,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/core: fix illegal RCU from offline CPUs
On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 10:00:16AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
>
>
> > On Apr 2, 2020, at 7:24 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:
> >
> > Qian Cai <cai@....pw> writes:
> >> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> >>
> >> In the CPU-offline process, it calls mmdrop() after idle entry and the
> >> subsequent call to cpuhp_report_idle_dead(). Once execution passes the
> >> call to rcu_report_dead(), RCU is ignoring the CPU, which results in
> >> lockdep complaining when mmdrop() uses RCU from either memcg or
> >> debugobjects below.
> >>
> >> Fix it by cleaning up the active_mm state from BP instead. Every arch
> >> which has CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU should have already called idle_task_exit()
> >> from AP. The only exception is parisc because it switches them to
> >> &init_mm unconditionally (see smp_boot_one_cpu() and smp_cpu_init()),
> >> but the patch will still work there because it calls mmgrab(&init_mm) in
> >> smp_cpu_init() and then should call mmdrop(&init_mm) in finish_cpu().
> >
> > Thanks for debugging this. How did you hit it in the first place?
>
> Just repeatedly offline/online CPUs which will eventually cause an idle thread
> refcount goes to 0 and trigger __mmdrop() and of course it needs to enable
> lockdep (PROVE_RCU?) as well as having luck to hit the cgroup, workqueue
> or debugobject code paths to call RCU.
>
> >
> > A link to the original thread would have helped me:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200113190331.12788-1-cai@lca.pw/
> >
> >> WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> >> -----------------------------
> >> kernel/workqueue.c:710 RCU or wq_pool_mutex should be held!
> >>
> >> other info that might help us debug this:
> >>
> >> RCU used illegally from offline CPU!
> >> Call Trace:
> >> dump_stack+0xf4/0x164 (unreliable)
> >> lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0x140/0x164
> >> get_work_pool+0x110/0x150
> >> __queue_work+0x1bc/0xca0
> >> queue_work_on+0x114/0x120
> >> css_release+0x9c/0xc0
> >> percpu_ref_put_many+0x204/0x230
> >> free_pcp_prepare+0x264/0x570
> >> free_unref_page+0x38/0xf0
> >> __mmdrop+0x21c/0x2c0
> >> idle_task_exit+0x170/0x1b0
> >> pnv_smp_cpu_kill_self+0x38/0x2e0
> >> cpu_die+0x48/0x64
> >> arch_cpu_idle_dead+0x30/0x50
> >> do_idle+0x2f4/0x470
> >> cpu_startup_entry+0x38/0x40
> >> start_secondary+0x7a8/0xa80
> >> start_secondary_resume+0x10/0x14
> >
> > Do we know when this started happening? ie. can we determine a Fixes
> > tag?
>
> I don’t know. I looked at some commits that it seems the code was like that
> even 10-year ago. It must be nobody who cares to run lockdep (PROVE_RCU?)
> with CPU hotplug very regularly.
I do run this combination quite frequently, but only as part of
rcutorture, which might not be a representative workload. For one thing,
it has a minimal userspace consisting only of a trivial init program.
I don't recall having ever seen this. (I have seen one recent complaint
about an IPI being sent to an offline CPU, but I cannot prove that this
was not due to RCU bugs that I was chasing at the time.)
Thanx, Paul
> >> <Peter to sign off here>
> >> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
> >> ---
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/smp.c | 1 -
> >> include/linux/sched/mm.h | 2 ++
> >> kernel/cpu.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
> >> kernel/sched/core.c | 5 +++--
> >> 4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/smp.c
> >> index 13e251699346..b2ba3e95bda7 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/smp.c
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/smp.c
> >> @@ -167,7 +167,6 @@ static void pnv_smp_cpu_kill_self(void)
> >> /* Standard hot unplug procedure */
> >>
> >> idle_task_exit();
> >> - current->active_mm = NULL; /* for sanity */
> >
> > If I'm reading it right, we'll now be running with active_mm == init_mm
> > in the offline loop.
> >
> > I guess that's fine, I can't think of any reason it would matter, and it
> > seems like we were NULL'ing it out just for paranoia's sake not because
> > of any actual problem.
> >
> > Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> (powerpc)
> >
> >
> > cheers
> >
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/mm.h b/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> >> index c49257a3b510..a132d875d351 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> >> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ static inline void mmdrop(struct mm_struct *mm)
> >> __mmdrop(mm);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +void mmdrop(struct mm_struct *mm);
> >> +
> >> /*
> >> * This has to be called after a get_task_mm()/mmget_not_zero()
> >> * followed by taking the mmap_sem for writing before modifying the
> >> diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
> >> index 2371292f30b0..244d30544377 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/cpu.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/cpu.c
> >> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> >> *
> >> * This code is licenced under the GPL.
> >> */
> >> +#include <linux/sched/mm.h>
> >> #include <linux/proc_fs.h>
> >> #include <linux/smp.h>
> >> #include <linux/init.h>
> >> @@ -564,6 +565,21 @@ static int bringup_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> >> return bringup_wait_for_ap(cpu);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static int finish_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> >> +{
> >> + struct task_struct *idle = idle_thread_get(cpu);
> >> + struct mm_struct *mm = idle->active_mm;
> >> +
> >> + /*
> >> + * idle_task_exit() will have switched to &init_mm, now
> >> + * clean up any remaining active_mm state.
> >> + */
> >> + if (mm != &init_mm)
> >> + idle->active_mm = &init_mm;
> >> + mmdrop(mm);
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> /*
> >> * Hotplug state machine related functions
> >> */
> >> @@ -1549,7 +1565,7 @@ static struct cpuhp_step cpuhp_hp_states[] = {
> >> [CPUHP_BRINGUP_CPU] = {
> >> .name = "cpu:bringup",
> >> .startup.single = bringup_cpu,
> >> - .teardown.single = NULL,
> >> + .teardown.single = finish_cpu,
> >> .cant_stop = true,
> >> },
> >> /* Final state before CPU kills itself */
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> index a2694ba82874..8787958339d5 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> @@ -6200,13 +6200,14 @@ void idle_task_exit(void)
> >> struct mm_struct *mm = current->active_mm;
> >>
> >> BUG_ON(cpu_online(smp_processor_id()));
> >> + BUG_ON(current != this_rq()->idle);
> >>
> >> if (mm != &init_mm) {
> >> switch_mm(mm, &init_mm, current);
> >> - current->active_mm = &init_mm;
> >> finish_arch_post_lock_switch();
> >> }
> >> - mmdrop(mm);
> >> +
> >> + /* finish_cpu(), as ran on the BP, will clean up the active_mm state */
> >> }
> >>
> >> /*
> >> --
> >> 2.21.0 (Apple Git-122.2)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists