| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <EA929A9653AAE14F841771FB1DE5A1365F56B664A3@rrsmsx501.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:54:14 -0700
From: "Tantilov, Emil S" <emil.s.tantilov@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
"Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Subject: RE: unsafe locks seen with netperf on net-2.6.29 tree
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-12-27 at 12:38 -0700, Tantilov, Emil S wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>>> index 9007ccd..a074d77 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/percpu_counter.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/percpu_counter.h
>>> @@ -30,8 +30,16 @@ struct percpu_counter {
>>> #define FBC_BATCH (NR_CPUS*4)
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> -int percpu_counter_init(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount);
>>> -int percpu_counter_init_irq(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64
>>> amount); +int __percpu_counter_init(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64
>>> amount, + struct lock_class_key *key); +
>>> +#define percpu_counter_init(fbc, value)
>>> \ + do {
>>> \ + static struct lock_class_key __key;
>>> \ +
>>> \ + __percpu_counter_init(fbc, value, &__key);
>>> \ + } while (0) +
>>> void percpu_counter_destroy(struct percpu_counter *fbc);
>>> void percpu_counter_set(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount);
>>> void __percpu_counter_add(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount,
>
>> This patch fails to compile:
>>
>> mm/backing-dev.c: In function 'bdi_init':
>> mm/backing-dev.c:226: error: expected expression bedore 'do'
>
> Ah indeed, stupid me...
>
> Please try something like this instead of the above hunk:
>
> @@ -30,8 +30,16 @@ struct percpu_counter {
> #define FBC_BATCH (NR_CPUS*4)
> #endif
>
> -int percpu_counter_init(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount);
> -int percpu_counter_init_irq(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount);
> +int __percpu_counter_init(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount,
> + struct lock_class_key *key);
> +
> +#define percpu_counter_init(fbc, value)
> \ + ({
> \ + static struct lock_class_key __key;
> \ +
> \ + __percpu_counter_init(fbc, value, &__key);
> \ + })
> +
> void percpu_counter_destroy(struct percpu_counter *fbc);
> void percpu_counter_set(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount);
> void __percpu_counter_add(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount,
> s32 batch)
With this compiled, but I still get the following:
[ 435.632627] =================================
[ 435.633030] [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
[ 435.633037] 2.6.28-rc8-net-next-igbL #14
[ 435.633040] ---------------------------------
[ 435.633044] inconsistent {in-softirq-W} -> {softirq-on-W} usage.
[ 435.633049] netperf/12669 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
[ 435.633053] (key#8){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff803691ac>] __percpu_counter_add+0x4a/0x6d
[ 435.633068] {in-softirq-W} state was registered at:
[ 435.633070] [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
[ 435.633078] irq event stamp: 988533
[ 435.633080] hardirqs last enabled at (988533): [<ffffffff80243712>] _local_bh_enable_ip+0xc8/0xcd
[ 435.633088] hardirqs last disabled at (988531): [<ffffffff8024369e>] _local_bh_enable_ip+0x54/0xcd
[ 435.633093] softirqs last enabled at (988532): [<ffffffff804fc814>] sock_orphan+0x3f/0x44
[ 435.633100] softirqs last disabled at (988530): [<ffffffff8056454d>] _write_lock_bh+0x11/0x3d
[ 435.633107]
[ 435.633108] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 435.633110] 1 lock held by netperf/12669:
[ 435.633112] #0: (sk_lock-AF_INET6){--..}, at: [<ffffffff804fc544>] lock_sock+0xb/0xd
[ 435.633119]
[ 435.633120] stack backtrace:
[ 435.633124] Pid: 12669, comm: netperf Not tainted 2.6.28-rc8-net-next-igbL #14
[ 435.633127] Call Trace:
[ 435.633134] [<ffffffff8025ffb8>] print_usage_bug+0x159/0x16a
[ 435.633139] [<ffffffff8026000e>] valid_state+0x45/0x52
[ 435.633143] [<ffffffff802601cf>] mark_lock_irq+0x1b4/0x27b
[ 435.633148] [<ffffffff80260339>] mark_lock+0xa3/0x110
[ 435.633152] [<ffffffff80260480>] mark_irqflags+0xda/0xf2
[ 435.633157] [<ffffffff8026122e>] __lock_acquire+0x1c3/0x2ee
[ 435.633161] [<ffffffff80261d93>] lock_acquire+0x55/0x71
[ 435.633166] [<ffffffff803691ac>] ? __percpu_counter_add+0x4a/0x6d
[ 435.633170] [<ffffffff80564434>] _spin_lock+0x2c/0x38
[ 435.633175] [<ffffffff803691ac>] ? __percpu_counter_add+0x4a/0x6d
[ 435.633179] [<ffffffff803691ac>] __percpu_counter_add+0x4a/0x6d
[ 435.633184] [<ffffffff804fc827>] percpu_counter_add+0xe/0x10
[ 435.633188] [<ffffffff804fc837>] percpu_counter_inc+0xe/0x10
[ 435.633193] [<ffffffff804fdc91>] tcp_close+0x157/0x2da
[ 435.633197] [<ffffffff8051907e>] inet_release+0x58/0x5f
[ 435.633204] [<ffffffff80527c48>] inet6_release+0x30/0x35
[ 435.633213] [<ffffffff804c9354>] sock_release+0x1a/0x76
[ 435.633221] [<ffffffff804c9804>] sock_close+0x22/0x26
[ 435.633229] [<ffffffff802a345a>] __fput+0x82/0x110
[ 435.633234] [<ffffffff802a381a>] fput+0x15/0x17
[ 435.633239] [<ffffffff802a09c5>] filp_close+0x67/0x72
[ 435.633246] [<ffffffff80240ae3>] close_files+0x66/0x8d
[ 435.633251] [<ffffffff80240b39>] put_files_struct+0x19/0x42
[ 435.633256] [<ffffffff80240b98>] exit_files+0x36/0x3b
[ 435.633260] [<ffffffff80241eec>] do_exit+0x1b7/0x2b1
[ 435.633265] [<ffffffff80242087>] sys_exit_group+0x0/0x14
[ 435.633269] [<ffffffff80242099>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x14
[ 435.633275] [<ffffffff8020b9cb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Thanks,
Emil
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists