[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210302123444.GA97498@lothringen>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:34:44 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] rcu/nocb: Fix potential missed nocb_timer rearm
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 05:48:29PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:06:06PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 10:37:09AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 01:09:59AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > Two situations can cause a missed nocb timer rearm:
> > > >
> > > > 1) rdp(CPU A) queues its nocb timer. The grace period elapses before
> > > > the timer get a chance to fire. The nocb_gp kthread is awaken by
> > > > rdp(CPU B). The nocb_cb kthread for rdp(CPU A) is awaken and
> > > > process the callbacks, again before the nocb_timer for CPU A get a
> > > > chance to fire. rdp(CPU A) queues a callback and wakes up nocb_gp
> > > > kthread, cancelling the pending nocb_timer without resetting the
> > > > corresponding nocb_defer_wakeup.
> > >
> > > As discussed offlist, expanding the above scenario results in this
> > > sequence of steps:
>
> I renumbered the CPUs, since the ->nocb_gp_kthread would normally be
> associated with CPU 0. If the first CPU to enqueue a callback was also
> CPU 0, nocb_gp_wait() might clear that CPU's ->nocb_defer_wakeup, which
> would prevent this scenario from playing out. (But admittedly only if
> some other CPU handled by this same ->nocb_gp_kthread used its bypass.)
Ok good point.
>
> > > 1. There are no callbacks queued for any CPU covered by CPU 0-2's
> > > ->nocb_gp_kthread.
>
> And ->nocb_gp_kthread is associated with CPU 0.
>
> > > 2. CPU 1 enqueues its first callback with interrupts disabled, and
> > > thus must defer awakening its ->nocb_gp_kthread. It therefore
> > > queues its rcu_data structure's ->nocb_timer.
>
> At this point, CPU 1's rdp->nocb_defer_wakeup is RCU_NOCB_WAKE.
Right.
> > > 7. The grace period ends, so rcu_gp_kthread awakens the
> > > ->nocb_gp_kthread, which in turn awakens both CPU 1's and
> > > CPU 2's ->nocb_cb_kthread.
>
> And then ->nocb_cb_kthread sleeps waiting for more callbacks.
Yep
> > I managed to recollect some pieces of my brain. So keep the above but
> > let's change the point 10:
> >
> > 10. CPU 1 enqueues its second callback, this time with interrupts
> > enabled so it can wake directly ->nocb_gp_kthread.
> > It does so with calling __wake_nocb_gp() which also cancels the
>
> wake_nocb_gp() in current -rcu, correct?
Heh, right.
> > > So far so good, but why isn't the timer still queued from back in step 2?
> > > What am I missing here? Either way, could you please update the commit
> > > logs to tell the full story? At some later time, you might be very
> > > happy that you did. ;-)
> > >
> > > > 2) The "nocb_bypass_timer" ends up calling wake_nocb_gp() which deletes
> > > > the pending "nocb_timer" (note they are not the same timers) for the
> > > > given rdp without resetting the matching state stored in nocb_defer
> > > > wakeup.
>
> Would like to similarly expand this one, or would you prefer to rest your
> case on Case 1) above?
I was about to say that we can skip that one, the changelog will already be
big enough but the "Fixes:" tag refers to the second scenario, since it's the
oldest vulnerable commit AFAICS.
> > > > Fixes: d1b222c6be1f (rcu/nocb: Add bypass callback queueing)
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists