linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rcu-tasks: Avoid pr_info() with spin lock in cblist_init

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]

Message-ID: <223892ae-648e-4931-8c11-063de83d2c40@paulmck-laptop>
Date:   Tue, 21 Mar 2023 08:59:39 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Shigeru Yoshida <syoshida@...hat.com>
Cc:     frederic@...nel.org, neeraju@...cinc.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        jiangshanlai@...il.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
        rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu-tasks: Avoid pr_info() with spin lock in
 cblist_init_generic()

On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 05:02:52PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 01:22:05AM +0900, Shigeru Yoshida wrote:
> > pr_info() is called with rtp->cbs_gbl_lock spin lock locked.  Because
> > pr_info() calls printk() that might sleep, this will result in BUG
> > like below:
> > 
> > [    0.206455] cblist_init_generic: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.
> > [    0.206463]
> > [    0.206464] =============================
> > [    0.206464] [ BUG: Invalid wait context ]
> > [    0.206465] 5.19.0-00428-g9de1f9c8ca51 #5 Not tainted
> > [    0.206466] -----------------------------
> > [    0.206466] swapper/0/1 is trying to lock:
> > [    0.206467] ffffffffa0167a58 (&port_lock_key){....}-{3:3}, at: serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > [    0.206473] other info that might help us debug this:
> > [    0.206473] context-{5:5}
> > [    0.206474] 3 locks held by swapper/0/1:
> > [    0.206474]  #0: ffffffff9eb597e0 (rcu_tasks.cbs_gbl_lock){....}-{2:2}, at: cblist_init_generic.constprop.0+0x14/0x1f0
> > [    0.206478]  #1: ffffffff9eb579c0 (console_lock){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: _printk+0x63/0x7e
> > [    0.206482]  #2: ffffffff9ea77780 (console_owner){....}-{0:0}, at: console_emit_next_record.constprop.0+0x111/0x330
> > [    0.206485] stack backtrace:
> > [    0.206486] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.19.0-00428-g9de1f9c8ca51 #5
> > [    0.206488] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.0-1.fc36 04/01/2014
> > [    0.206489] Call Trace:
> > [    0.206490]  <TASK>
> > [    0.206491]  dump_stack_lvl+0x6a/0x9f
> > [    0.206493]  __lock_acquire.cold+0x2d7/0x2fe
> > [    0.206496]  ? stack_trace_save+0x46/0x70
> > [    0.206497]  lock_acquire+0xd1/0x2f0
> > [    0.206499]  ? serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > [    0.206500]  ? __lock_acquire+0x5c7/0x2720
> > [    0.206502]  _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x90
> > [    0.206504]  ? serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > [    0.206506]  serial8250_console_write+0x327/0x4a0
> > [    0.206508]  console_emit_next_record.constprop.0+0x180/0x330
> > [    0.206511]  console_unlock+0xf7/0x1f0
> > [    0.206512]  vprintk_emit+0xf7/0x330
> > [    0.206514]  _printk+0x63/0x7e
> > [    0.206516]  cblist_init_generic.constprop.0.cold+0x24/0x32
> > [    0.206518]  rcu_init_tasks_generic+0x5/0xd9
> > [    0.206522]  kernel_init_freeable+0x15b/0x2a2
> > [    0.206523]  ? rest_init+0x160/0x160
> > [    0.206526]  kernel_init+0x11/0x120
> > [    0.206527]  ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> > [    0.206530]  </TASK>
> > [    0.207018] cblist_init_generic: Setting shift to 1 and lim to 1.
> > 
> > This patch moves pr_info() so that it is called without
> > rtp->cbs_gbl_lock locked.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Shigeru Yoshida <syoshida@...hat.com>
> 
> This patch looks good, except that wasn't this supposed to be fixed
> in printk()?  Or am I suffering from wishful thinking?

And I was indeed suffering from wishful thinking, so I have queued this
patch.  A big "thank you!" to all for your patience, and to Shigeru for
this fix!

							Thanx, Paul

> > ---
> >  kernel/rcu/tasks.h | 5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > index 3925e32159b5..d46dd970bf22 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > @@ -227,7 +227,6 @@ static void cblist_init_generic(struct rcu_tasks *rtp)
> >  	if (rcu_task_enqueue_lim < 0) {
> >  		rcu_task_enqueue_lim = 1;
> >  		rcu_task_cb_adjust = true;
> > -		pr_info("%s: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.\n", __func__);
> >  	} else if (rcu_task_enqueue_lim == 0) {
> >  		rcu_task_enqueue_lim = 1;
> >  	}
> > @@ -256,6 +255,10 @@ static void cblist_init_generic(struct rcu_tasks *rtp)
> >  		raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(rtpcp); // irqs remain disabled.
> >  	}
> >  	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtp->cbs_gbl_lock, flags);
> > +
> > +	if (rcu_task_cb_adjust)
> > +		pr_info("%s: Setting adjustable number of callback queues.\n", __func__);
> > +
> >  	pr_info("%s: Setting shift to %d and lim to %d.\n", __func__, data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_shift), data_race(rtp->percpu_enqueue_lim));
> >  }
> >  
> > -- 
> > 2.37.1
> >