mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline/rtmutex: Fix a PI crash for deadline tasks
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 11:19:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160405091954.GI3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57037974.1020002@redhat.com>

On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 04:38:12PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> On 2016/04/02 at 05:51, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:34:24PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> >
> >>>> I checked the code, currently only deadline accesses the
> >>>> pi_waiters/pi_waiters_leftmost
> >>>> without pi_lock held via rt_mutex_get_top_task(), other cases all have
> >>>> pi_lock held.
> >> Any better ideas is welcome.
> > Something like the below _might_ work; but its late and I haven't looked
> > at the PI code in a while. This basically caches a pointer to the top
> > waiter task in the running task_struct, under pi_lock and rq->lock, and
> > therefore we can use it with only rq->lock held.
> >
> > Since the task is blocked, and cannot unblock without taking itself from
> > the block chain -- which would cause rt_mutex_setprio() to set another
> > top waiter task, the lifetime rules should be good.
> 
> In rt_mutex_slowunlock(), we release pi_lock and and wait_lock first, then
> wake up the top waiter, then call rt_mutex_adjust_prio(), so there is a small
> window without any lock or irq disabled between the top waiter wake up
> and rt_mutex_adjust_prio(), which can cause problems.

That is rt_mutex_fastunlock()'s:

	bool deboost = slowfs(lock, &wake_q); /* -> rt_mutex_slowunlock() */

	wake_up_q(&wake_q);

	if (deboost)
		rt_mutex_adjust_prio(current);


(and the IRQ enabled is irrelevant, SMP can race regardless)

> For example, before calling rt_mutex_adjust_prio() to adjust the cached pointer,
> if current is preempted and the waken top waiter exited, after that, the task is
> back, and it may enter enqueue_task_dl() before entering rt_mutex_adjust_prio(),
> where the cached pointer is updated, so it will access a stale cached pointer.

Hmm, so I would argue that that is a bug in any case. Its an effective
priority 'leak', we should deboost before letting the booster run again.

But it looks like a simple fix, simply call wake_up_q() after the
deboost. The wake_q has a reference on the task so it cannot go away,
which ensures any dereferences from within the DL code must still be
valid.

Or did I miss something (again) ? :-)

---
 kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index 3e746607abe5..36eb232bd29f 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1390,11 +1390,11 @@ rt_mutex_fastunlock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
 	} else {
 		bool deboost = slowfn(lock, &wake_q);
 
-		wake_up_q(&wake_q);
-
 		/* Undo pi boosting if necessary: */
 		if (deboost)
 			rt_mutex_adjust_prio(current);
+
+		wake_up_q(&wake_q);
 	}
 }
 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-05  9:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-01 11:00 Xunlei Pang
2016-04-01 11:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-01 12:23   ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-01 13:12     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-01 13:34       ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-01 21:51         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-02 10:19           ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-05  8:38           ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-05  9:19             ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-04-05  9:29               ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 10:48                 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-05 11:32                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 16:25                 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-08 17:38                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 18:50                     ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-08 18:59                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 19:15                         ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-08 19:28                           ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-09  3:27                             ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-09  3:25                         ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-09 13:29                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-10  8:22                             ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-12  3:08                               ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-12 15:51                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-13  2:13                                   ` Xunlei Pang

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=20160405091954.GI3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=xlpang@redhat.com \
    /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

Powered by JetHome