linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] sched: Replace rq::wake

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]

Date:   Sat, 6 Jun 2020 16:13:33 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, frederic@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, cai@....pw,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] sched: Replace rq::wake_list

On 6/5/20 9:15 AM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:41:54AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 05:24:33PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 07:18:37AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 06:11:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>> The recent commit: 90b5363acd47 ("sched: Clean up scheduler_ipi()")
>>>>> got smp_call_function_single_async() subtly wrong. Even though it will
>>>>> return -EBUSY when trying to re-use a csd, that condition is not
>>>>> atomic and still requires external serialization.
>>>>>
>>>>> The change in ttwu_queue_remote() got this wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> While on first reading ttwu_queue_remote() has an atomic test-and-set
>>>>> that appears to serialize the use, the matching 'release' is not in
>>>>> the right place to actually guarantee this serialization.
>>>>>
>>>>> The actual race is vs the sched_ttwu_pending() call in the idle loop;
>>>>> that can run the wakeup-list without consuming the CSD.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of trying to chain the lists, merge them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>> ...
>>>>> +	/*
>>>>> +	 * Assert the CSD_TYPE_TTWU layout is similar enough
>>>>> +	 * for task_struct to be on the @call_single_queue.
>>>>> +	 */
>>>>> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct task_struct, wake_entry_type) - offsetof(struct task_struct, wake_entry) !=
>>>>> +		     offsetof(struct __call_single_data, flags) - offsetof(struct __call_single_data, llist));
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> There is no guarantee in C that
>>>>
>>>> 	type1 a;
>>>> 	type2 b;
>>>>
>>>> in two different data structures means that offsetof(b) - offsetof(a)
>>>> is the same in both data structures unless attributes such as
>>>> __attribute__((__packed__)) are used.
>>>>
>>>> As result, this does and will cause a variety of build errors depending
>>>> on the compiler version and compile flags.
>>>>
>>>> Guenter
>>>
>>> Yep, this breaks the build for me.
>>
>> -ENOCONFIG
> 
> For me, the problem seems to be randstruct.  To reproduce, you can use
> (on x86_64):
> 
> 	make defconfig
> 	echo CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT=y >> .config
> 	make olddefconfig
> 	make kernel/smp.o
> 

I confirmed that disabling CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT "fixes" the problem
in my test builds. Maybe it would make sense to mark that configuration option
for the time being as BROKEN.

Guenter