[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210609115400.GD104634@lothringen>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 13:54:00 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] posix-cpu-timers: Fix rearm racing against process
tick
On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 01:31:54PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Since the process wide cputime counter is started locklessly from
> posix_cpu_timer_rearm(), it can be concurrently stopped by operations
> on other timers from the same thread group, such as in the following
> unlucky scenario:
>
> CPU 0 CPU 1
> ----- -----
> timer_settime(TIMER B)
> posix_cpu_timer_rearm(TIMER A)
> cpu_clock_sample_group()
> (pct->timers_active already true)
>
> handle_posix_cpu_timers()
> check_process_timers()
> stop_process_timers()
> pct->timers_active = false
> arm_timer(TIMER A)
>
> tick -> run_posix_cpu_timers()
> // sees !pct->timers_active, ignore
> // our TIMER A
>
> Fix this with simply locking process wide cputime counting start and
> timer arm in the same block.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Fixes: 60f2ceaa8111 ("posix-cpu-timers: Remove unnecessary locking around cpu_clock_sample_group")
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists