linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4] lockdep: fix deadlock issue between lockdep and rcu

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: <ZgwnDnrLJUPyYKYW@google.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2024 15:41:02 +0000
From: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>
To: Zhiguo Niu <zhiguo.niu@...soc.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com,
	boqun.feng@...il.com
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org,
	longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, bvanassche@....org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, niuzhiguo84@...il.com,
	ke.wang@...soc.com, xuewen.yan@...soc.com, hongyu.jin@...soc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] lockdep: fix deadlock issue between lockdep and rcu

On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 07:44:55PM +0800, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
> There is a deadlock scenario between lockdep and rcu when
> rcu nocb feature is enabled, just as following call stack:
> 
>      rcuop/x
> -000|queued_spin_lock_slowpath(lock = 0xFFFFFF817F2A8A80, val = ?)
> -001|queued_spin_lock(inline) // try to hold nocb_gp_lock
> -001|do_raw_spin_lock(lock = 0xFFFFFF817F2A8A80)
> -002|__raw_spin_lock_irqsave(inline)
> -002|_raw_spin_lock_irqsave(lock = 0xFFFFFF817F2A8A80)
> -003|wake_nocb_gp_defer(inline)
> -003|__call_rcu_nocb_wake(rdp = 0xFFFFFF817F30B680)
> -004|__call_rcu_common(inline)
> -004|call_rcu(head = 0xFFFFFFC082EECC28, func = ?)
> -005|call_rcu_zapped(inline)
> -005|free_zapped_rcu(ch = ?)// hold graph lock
> -006|rcu_do_batch(rdp = 0xFFFFFF817F245680)
> -007|nocb_cb_wait(inline)
> -007|rcu_nocb_cb_kthread(arg = 0xFFFFFF817F245680)
> -008|kthread(_create = 0xFFFFFF80803122C0)
> -009|ret_from_fork(asm)
> 
>      rcuop/y
> -000|queued_spin_lock_slowpath(lock = 0xFFFFFFC08291BBC8, val = 0)
> -001|queued_spin_lock()
> -001|lockdep_lock()
> -001|graph_lock() // try to hold graph lock
> -002|lookup_chain_cache_add()
> -002|validate_chain()
> -003|lock_acquire
> -004|_raw_spin_lock_irqsave(lock = 0xFFFFFF817F211D80)
> -005|lock_timer_base(inline)
> -006|mod_timer(inline)
> -006|wake_nocb_gp_defer(inline)// hold nocb_gp_lock
> -006|__call_rcu_nocb_wake(rdp = 0xFFFFFF817F2A8680)
> -007|__call_rcu_common(inline)
> -007|call_rcu(head = 0xFFFFFFC0822E0B58, func = ?)
> -008|call_rcu_hurry(inline)
> -008|rcu_sync_call(inline)
> -008|rcu_sync_func(rhp = 0xFFFFFFC0822E0B58)
> -009|rcu_do_batch(rdp = 0xFFFFFF817F266680)
> -010|nocb_cb_wait(inline)
> -010|rcu_nocb_cb_kthread(arg = 0xFFFFFF817F266680)
> -011|kthread(_create = 0xFFFFFF8080363740)
> -012|ret_from_fork(asm)
> 
> rcuop/x and rcuop/y are rcu nocb threads with the same nocb gp thread.
> This patch release the graph lock before lockdep call_rcu.
> 
> Fixes: a0b0fd53e1e6 ("locking/lockdep: Free lock classes that are no longer in use")
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>
> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> Cc: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>
> Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
> Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <zhiguo.niu@...soc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@...soc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>
> Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
> ---

This patch should be good to go. Maybe it just slipped through the
cracks. Ingo, will you be taking this?

--
Carlos Llamas