linux-kernel - [tip: core/rcu] rcu/tree: Add a warning if CPU being onlined did not report QS already

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

Message-ID: <160788606158.3364.12923567099061997858.tip-bot2@tip-bot2>
Date:   Sun, 13 Dec 2020 19:01:01 -0000
From:   "tip-bot2 for Joel Fernandes (Google)" <tip-bot2@...utronix.de>
To:     linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [tip: core/rcu] rcu/tree: Add a warning if CPU being onlined did not
 report QS already

The following commit has been merged into the core/rcu branch of tip:

Commit-ID:     9f866dac94292f93d3b6bf8dbe860a44b954e555
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/9f866dac94292f93d3b6bf8dbe860a44b954e555
Author:        Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
AuthorDate:    Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:29:27 -04:00
Committer:     Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
CommitterDate: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:37:16 -08:00

rcu/tree: Add a warning if CPU being onlined did not report QS already

Currently, rcu_cpu_starting() checks to see if the RCU core expects a
quiescent state from the incoming CPU.  However, the current interaction
between RCU quiescent-state reporting and CPU-hotplug operations should
mean that the incoming CPU never needs to report a quiescent state.
First, the outgoing CPU reports a quiescent state if needed.  Second,
the race where the CPU is leaving just as RCU is initializing a new
grace period is handled by an explicit check for this condition.  Third,
the CPU's leaf rcu_node structure's ->lock serializes these checks.

This means that if rcu_cpu_starting() ever feels the need to report
a quiescent state, then there is a bug somewhere in the CPU hotplug
code or the RCU grace-period handling code.  This commit therefore
adds a WARN_ON_ONCE() to bring that bug to everyone's attention.

Cc: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>
Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 39e14cf..e4d6d0b 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -4075,7 +4075,9 @@ void rcu_cpu_starting(unsigned int cpu)
 	rcu_gpnum_ovf(rnp, rdp); /* Offline-induced counter wrap? */
 	rdp->rcu_onl_gp_seq = READ_ONCE(rcu_state.gp_seq);
 	rdp->rcu_onl_gp_flags = READ_ONCE(rcu_state.gp_flags);
-	if (rnp->qsmask & mask) { /* RCU waiting on incoming CPU? */
+
+	/* An incoming CPU should never be blocking a grace period. */
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(rnp->qsmask & mask)) { /* RCU waiting on incoming CPU? */
 		rcu_disable_urgency_upon_qs(rdp);
 		/* Report QS -after- changing ->qsmaskinitnext! */
 		rcu_report_qs_rnp(mask, rnp, rnp->gp_seq, flags);