linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.15 00/23] 5.15.160-rc1 review

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: <58fa929b-1713-472e-953f-7944be428049@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 09:59:34 +0100
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
 linux-stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
 "patches@...ts.linux.dev" <patches@...ts.linux.dev>,
 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Guenter Roeck
 <linux@...ck-us.net>, "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
 "patches@...nelci.org" <patches@...nelci.org>,
 "lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org" <lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org>,
 "pavel@...x.de" <pavel@...x.de>, "f.fainelli@...il.com"
 <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
 "sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com" <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
 "srw@...dewatkins.net" <srw@...dewatkins.net>,
 "rwarsow@....de" <rwarsow@....de>, "conor@...nel.org" <conor@...nel.org>,
 "allen.lkml@...il.com" <allen.lkml@...il.com>,
 "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
 "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 00/23] 5.15.160-rc1 review


On 29/05/2024 00:42, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2024, NeilBrown wrote:
>>
>> We probably just need to add "| TASK_FREEZABLE" in one or two places.
>> I'll post a patch for testing in a little while.
> 
> There is no TASK_FREEZABLE before v6.1.
> This isn't due to a missed backport. It is simply because of differences
> in the freezer in older kernels.
> 
> Please test this patch.
> 
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
> 
>  From 416bd6ae9a598e64931d34b76aa58f39b11841cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
> Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 09:38:22 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] sunrpc: exclude from freezer when waiting for requests:
> 
> Prior to v6.1, the freezer will only wake a kernel thread from an
> uninterruptible sleep.  Since we changed svc_get_next_xprt() to use and
> IDLE sleep the freezer cannot wake it.  we need to tell the freezer to
> ignore it instead.
> 
> Fixes: 9b8a8e5e8129 ("nfsd: don't allow nfsd threads to be signalled.")
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
> ---
>   net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c | 2 ++
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c b/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
> index b19592673eef..12e9293bd12b 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
> @@ -764,10 +764,12 @@ static struct svc_xprt *svc_get_next_xprt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, long timeout)
>   	clear_bit(RQ_BUSY, &rqstp->rq_flags);
>   	smp_mb__after_atomic();
>   
> +	freezer_do_not_count();
>   	if (likely(rqst_should_sleep(rqstp)))
>   		time_left = schedule_timeout(timeout);
>   	else
>   		__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> +	freezer_count();
>   
>   	try_to_freeze();
>   


Thanks. I gave this a try on top of v5.15.160-rc1, but I am still seeing
the following and the board hangs ...

Freezing of tasks failed after 20.004 seconds (1 tasks refusing to freeze, wq_busy=0):

So unfortunately this does not fix it :-(

Jon

-- 
nvpublic