mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] Use printk_safe context for TTY and UART port locks
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 18:39:13 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180615093919.559-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> (raw)

	Hello,

	RFC

	printk_safe buffers help us to avoid printk() deadlocks that are
caused by recursive printk() calls, e.g.

printk()
 vprintk_emit()
 spin_lock(&logbuf_lock)
  vsnprintf()
   format_decode()
    warn_slowpath_fmt()
     vprintk_emit()
     spin_lock(&logbuf_lock)   << deadlock

It doesn't come as a surprise that recursive printk() calls are not the
only way for us to deadlock in printk() and we still have a whole bunch
of other printk() deadlock scenarios. For instance, those that involve
TTY port->lock spin_lock and UART port->lock spin_lock.

syzbot recently hit one of such scenarios [1]:

 CPU0                                     CPU1
 tty_ioctl()
  spin_lock(&tty_port->lock)              IRQ
   kmalloc()                              foo_console_handle_IRQ()
    printk()                               spin_lock(&uart_port->lock)
     call_console_drivers()                 tty_wakeup()
      foo_console_driver()
       spin_lock(&uart_port->lock)           spin_lock(&tty_port->lock)

So the idea of this patch set is to take tty_port->lock and
uart_port->lock from printk_safe context and to eliminate some
of non-recursive printk() deadlocks - the ones that don't start
in printk(), but involve console related locks and thus eventually
deadlock us in printk(). For this purpose the patch set introduces
several helper macros:

- uart_port_lock_irq() / uart_port_unlock_irq()
  uart_port_lock_irqsave() / uart_port_unlock_irqrestore()

  To lock/unlock uart_port->lock spin_lock from printk_safe
  context.

And

- tty_port_lock_irq() / tty_port_unlock_irq()
  tty_port_lock_irqsave() / tty_port_unlock_irqrestore()

  To lock/unlock tty_port->lock spin_lock from printk_safe
  context.

I converted tty/pty/serial_core to use those helper macros.
Now, the boring part is that all serial console drivers must be converted
to use uart_port_lock macros. In this patch set I only modified the 8250
serial console [since this is RFC patch set], but if the patch set will
not see a lot of opposition I can do so for the rest of serial consoles
[or ask the maintainers to help me out]. The conversion is pretty
simple.

It would be great if we could "forbid" direct tty_port->lock and
uart_port->lock manipulation [I don't know, rename them to ->__lock]
and enforce uart_port_lock/tty_port_lock macros usage.

There are some other cases [2] that we can handle with this
patch set. For instance:

   IRQ
   spin_lock(&uart_port->lock)
    tty_wakeup()
     tty_port_default_wakeup()
      tty_port_tty_get()
       refcount_inc()
        WARN_ONCE()
         printk()
          call_console_drivers()
           foo_console_driver()
            spin_lock(&uart_port->lock)               << deadlock

Of course, TTY and UART port spin_locks are not the only locks that
we can deadlock on. So this patch set does not address all deadlock
scenarios, it just makes a small step forward.

Any opinions?

[1]: lkml.kernel.org/r/00000000000087008b056df8fbb3@google.com
[2]: lkml.kernel.org/r/20180607051019.GA10406@jagdpanzerIV

Sergey Senozhatsky (6):
  printk: move printk_safe macros to printk header
  tty: add tty_port locking helpers
  tty/pty: switch to tty_port helpers
  serial: add uart port locking helpers
  serial: switch to uart_port locking helpers
  tty: 8250: switch to uart_port locking helpers

 drivers/tty/pty.c                   |   4 +-
 drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c |   8 +-
 drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_dma.c  |   4 +-
 drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_port.c |  74 +++++++++----------
 drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c    | 109 ++++++++++++++--------------
 drivers/tty/tty_port.c              |  38 +++++-----
 include/linux/printk.h              |  40 ++++++++++
 include/linux/serial_core.h         |  35 +++++++++
 include/linux/tty.h                 |  24 ++++++
 kernel/printk/internal.h            |  37 ----------
 10 files changed, 218 insertions(+), 155 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.1


             reply	other threads:[~2018-06-15  9:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-15  9:39 Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2018-06-15  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/6] printk: move printk_safe macros to printk header Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-18  6:27   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-15  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/6] tty: add tty_port locking helpers Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-15  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/6] tty/pty: switch to tty_port helpers Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-15  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/6] serial: add uart port locking helpers Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-15  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/6] serial: switch to uart_port " Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-15  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/6] tty: 8250: " Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-18 13:38 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/6] Use printk_safe context for TTY and UART port locks Alan Cox
2018-06-19  0:53   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-19  8:30     ` Petr Mladek
2018-06-19  8:59       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-20  2:01       ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-20  2:34         ` Steven Rostedt
2018-06-20  2:44           ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-22 16:21             ` Alan Cox
2018-06-22 16:39               ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-23  5:21               ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-20  2:56           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-20  2:50         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-20  3:38           ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-20  4:28             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-28  2:55             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-06-19  8:08   ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20180615093919.559-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jslaby@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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®