linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] locking: Fix __clear_task_blocked_on() warning from __ww_mutex

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]

Message-ID: <CANDhNCrgxP+Ujvgpvd_0e5TM5Q-UTGfNmv=Lu3kn2MZ6wdS4Kw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 11:34:26 -0700
From: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	syzbot+602c4720aed62576cd79@...kaller.appspotmail.com, 
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, 
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, 
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>, Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>, airlied@...il.com, 
	mripard@...nel.org, simona@...ll.ch, tzimmermann@...e.de, 
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] locking: Fix __clear_task_blocked_on() warning from
 __ww_mutex_wound() path

On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 10:09 PM K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com> wrote:
> At the very least I think we should make a local copy of "p->blocked_on"
> to see a consistent view throughout __clear_task_blocked_on() - task either
> sees it is blocked on the mutex and clear "p->blocked_on", or it sees it is
> blocked on nothing and still clears "p->blocked_on".
>
> (Tested lightly with syzbot's C reproducer)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 02c340450469..f35d93cca64f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -2165,6 +2165,8 @@ static inline void set_task_blocked_on(struct task_struct *p, struct mutex *m)
>  static inline void __clear_task_blocked_on(struct task_struct *p, struct mutex *m)
>  {
>         if (m) {
> +               struct mutex *blocked_on = p->blocked_on;
> +
>                 /* Currently we serialize blocked_on under the mutex::wait_lock */
>                 lockdep_assert_held_once(&m->wait_lock);
>                 /*
> @@ -2172,7 +2174,7 @@ static inline void __clear_task_blocked_on(struct task_struct *p, struct mutex *
>                  * blocked_on relationships, but make sure we are not
>                  * clearing the relationship with a different lock.
>                  */
> -               WARN_ON_ONCE(m && p->blocked_on && p->blocked_on != m);
> +               WARN_ON_ONCE(m && blocked_on && blocked_on != m);
>         }
>         p->blocked_on = NULL;
>  }
> ---
>
> End result is the same, only that we avoid an unnecessary splat in this
> very unlikely case and save ourselves some head scratching later :)

Good point. Thanks for suggesting this! I'll rework to include both
this and Maarten's suggestions.

Thank you for the feedback!
-john