linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpu/hotplug: Set st->cpu earlier

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

Date:   Mon, 7 Mar 2022 15:41:46 +0000
From:   Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@....com>
To:     Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu/hotplug: Set st->cpu earlier

On 25/02/2022 13:49, Steven Price wrote:
> Setting the 'cpu' member of struct cpuhp_cpu_state in cpuhp_create() is
> too late as other callbacks can be made before that point. In particular > if one of the earlier callbacks fails and triggers a rollback that
> rollback will be done with st->cpu==0 causing CPU0 to be erroneously set

st->cpu is even needed before any cpuhp_step callback has been run 
(cpuhp_set_state() in _cpu_up()). So despite CPUHP_CREATE_THREADS being 
the first step, this is indeed not early enough.

> to be dying, causing the scheduler to get mightily confused and throw
> its toys out of the pram.
> 
> Move the assignment earlier before any callbacks have a chance to run.

Probably needs a

Fixes: 2ea46c6fc945 ("cpumask/hotplug: Fix cpu_dying() state tracking")

> 
> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
> CC: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
> ---
> This was initially triggered by a VM which didn't have enough memory for
> its VCPUs, but an easier way of triggering it is to make a change like
> below in __smpboot_create_thread (as suggested by Dietmar Eggemann) to
> pretend the memory allocation fails for a particular CPU:
> 
>   	td = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*td), GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu));
> -	if (!td)
> +	if (!td || cpu == 1)
>   		return -ENOMEM;
> 
> I'm not entirely sure quite where the best place to set st->cpu is, so
> please do let me know if there's a better place to do the assignment.
> ---
>   kernel/cpu.c | 3 ++-
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
> index 407a2568f35e..49c3ef6067e5 100644
> --- a/kernel/cpu.c
> +++ b/kernel/cpu.c
> @@ -720,7 +720,6 @@ static void cpuhp_create(unsigned int cpu)
>   
>   	init_completion(&st->done_up);
>   	init_completion(&st->done_down);
> -	st->cpu = cpu;
>   }
>   
>   static int cpuhp_should_run(unsigned int cpu)
> @@ -1333,6 +1332,8 @@ static int _cpu_up(unsigned int cpu, int tasks_frozen, enum cpuhp_state target)
>   		goto out;
>   	}
>   
> +	st->cpu = cpu;
> +

Could eventually go just before cpuhp_set_state(), in the same function 
as this seems to be the first user of st->cpu.

>   	/*
>   	 * The caller of cpu_up() might have raced with another
>   	 * caller. Nothing to do.