From: "tip-bot2 for Jann Horn" <tip-bot2@linutronix.de>
To: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [tip: locking/core] locking/mutex: Document that mutex_unlock() is non-atomic
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 10:44:09 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <170142744948.398.4203675877225809071.tip-bot2@tip-bot2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231130204817.2031407-1-jannh@google.com>
The following commit has been merged into the locking/core branch of tip:
Commit-ID: a51749ab34d9e5dec548fe38ede7e01e8bb26454
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/a51749ab34d9e5dec548fe38ede7e01e8bb26454
Author: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
AuthorDate: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 21:48:17 +01:00
Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CommitterDate: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 11:27:43 +01:00
locking/mutex: Document that mutex_unlock() is non-atomic
I have seen several cases of attempts to use mutex_unlock() to release an
object such that the object can then be freed by another task.
This is not safe because mutex_unlock(), in the
MUTEX_FLAG_WAITERS && !MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF case, accesses the mutex
structure after having marked it as unlocked; so mutex_unlock() requires
its caller to ensure that the mutex stays alive until mutex_unlock()
returns.
If MUTEX_FLAG_WAITERS is set and there are real waiters, those waiters
have to keep the mutex alive, but we could have a spurious
MUTEX_FLAG_WAITERS left if an interruptible/killable waiter bailed
between the points where __mutex_unlock_slowpath() did the cmpxchg
reading the flags and where it acquired the wait_lock.
( With spinlocks, that kind of code pattern is allowed and, from what I
remember, used in several places in the kernel. )
Document this, such a semantic difference between mutexes and spinlocks
is fairly unintuitive.
[ mingo: Made the changelog a bit more assertive, refined the comments. ]
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231130204817.2031407-1-jannh@google.com
---
Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst | 6 ++++++
kernel/locking/mutex.c | 5 +++++
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst b/Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst
index 78540cd..7572339 100644
--- a/Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst
+++ b/Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst
@@ -101,6 +101,12 @@ features that make lock debugging easier and faster:
- Detects multi-task circular deadlocks and prints out all affected
locks and tasks (and only those tasks).
+Releasing a mutex is not an atomic operation: Once a mutex release operation
+has begun, another context may be able to acquire the mutex before the release
+operation has fully completed. The mutex user must ensure that the mutex is not
+destroyed while a release operation is still in progress - in other words,
+callers of mutex_unlock() must ensure that the mutex stays alive until
+mutex_unlock() has returned.
Interfaces
----------
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index 2deeeca..cbae8c0 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -532,6 +532,11 @@ static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigne
* This function must not be used in interrupt context. Unlocking
* of a not locked mutex is not allowed.
*
+ * The caller must ensure that the mutex stays alive until this function has
+ * returned - mutex_unlock() can NOT directly be used to release an object such
+ * that another concurrent task can free it.
+ * Mutexes are different from spinlocks & refcounts in this aspect.
+ *
* This function is similar to (but not equivalent to) up().
*/
void __sched mutex_unlock(struct mutex *lock)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-01 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-30 20:48 [PATCH] locking: " Jann Horn
2023-11-30 21:53 ` Waiman Long
2023-11-30 22:24 ` Jann Horn
2023-11-30 23:56 ` Waiman Long
2023-12-01 10:33 ` [PATCH -v2] locking/mutex: " Ingo Molnar
2023-12-02 1:37 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2023-12-01 10:20 ` [PATCH] locking: " Ingo Molnar
2023-12-01 0:33 ` Waiman Long
2023-12-01 15:01 ` Jann Horn
[not found] ` <a9e19ad0-9a27-4885-a6ac-bebd3e997b02@redhat.com>
2023-12-01 16:03 ` Jann Horn
2023-12-01 18:12 ` David Laight
2023-12-01 18:18 ` Jann Horn
[not found] ` <1bcee696-d751-413c-a2ec-4a8480bae00b@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <780e652ff52044d4a213cacbd9276cf8@AcuMS.aculab.com>
2023-12-01 19:15 ` Waiman Long
2023-12-02 15:51 ` David Laight
2023-12-02 22:39 ` Waiman Long
2023-12-01 9:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-12-01 15:58 ` Jann Horn
2023-12-01 10:44 ` tip-bot2 for Jann Horn [this message]
2023-12-01 12:18 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/mutex: " Peter Zijlstra
2024-01-08 8:45 ` [PATCH] locking/mutex: Clarify that mutex_unlock(), and most other sleeping locks, cannot be used to reference-count objects Ingo Molnar
2024-01-08 9:00 ` [PATCH -v2] locking/mutex: Clarify that mutex_unlock(), and most other sleeping locks, can still use the lock object after it's unlocked Ingo Molnar
2024-01-08 15:28 ` [PATCH] locking/mutex: Clarify that mutex_unlock(), and most other sleeping locks, cannot be used to reference-count objects Jann Horn
2024-01-08 9:01 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/mutex: Clarify that mutex_unlock(), and most other sleeping locks, can still use the lock object after it's unlocked tip-bot2 for Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=170142744948.398.4203675877225809071.tip-bot2@tip-bot2 \
--to=tip-bot2@linutronix.de \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®