From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: frederic@kernel.org, quic_neeraju@quicinc.com,
joel@joelfernandes.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix race in set and clear TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP bitmask
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 12:08:49 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221221200849.GG4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221220112520.3596920-1-qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 07:25:20PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> For the kernel bulit with CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL enabled and the following
> cpus is nohz_full cpus:
>
> CPU1 CPU2
> rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait
> acquires rnp->lock mask = rnp->expmask;
> for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, mask)
> rnp->expmask = rnp->expmask & ~mask; rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu1);
> for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, mask)
> rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu1);
> if (!rdp->rcu_forced_tick_exp)
> continue; rdp->rcu_forced_tick_exp = true;
> tick_dep_set_cpu(cpu1, TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP);
>
> In the above scenario, after CPU1 reported the quiescent state, CPU1
> misses the opportunity to clear the TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP bitmask, it
> will not be cleared until the next expedited grace period starts and
> the CPU1 quiescent state is reported again. during this window period,
> the CPU1 whose tick can not be stopped, if CPU1 has only one runnable
> task and this task has aggressive real-time response constraints, this
> task may have one of the worst response times.
>
> Therefore, this commit add rnp->lock when set TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP
> bitmask to fix this race.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
Good eyes, thank you!!!
Queued for testing and further review as follows, as always, please
check for errors.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit acfe689f2e473fb59b6d2c95af5fe36198bb9a84
Author: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
Date: Tue Dec 20 19:25:20 2022 +0800
rcu: Fix set/clear TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP bitmask race
For kernels built with CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL=y, the following scenario can result
in the scheduling-clock interrupt remaining enabled on a holdout CPU after
its quiescent state has been reported:
CPU1 CPU2
rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait
acquires rnp->lock mask = rnp->expmask;
for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, mask)
rnp->expmask = rnp->expmask & ~mask; rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu1);
for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, mask)
rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu1);
if (!rdp->rcu_forced_tick_exp)
continue; rdp->rcu_forced_tick_exp = true;
tick_dep_set_cpu(cpu1, TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP);
The problem is that CPU2's sampling of rnp->expmask is obsolete by the
time it invokes tick_dep_set_cpu(), and CPU1 is not guaranteed to see
CPU2's store to ->rcu_forced_tick_exp in time to clear it. And even if
CPU1 does see that store, it might invoke tick_dep_clear_cpu() before
CPU2 got around to executing its tick_dep_set_cpu(), which would still
leave the victim CPU with its scheduler-clock tick running.
Either way, an nohz_full real-time application running on the victim
CPU would have its latency needlessly degraded.
Note that expedited RCU grace periods look at context-tracking
information, and so if the CPU is executing in nohz_full usermode
throughout, that CPU cannot be victimized in this manner.
This commit therefore causes synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait to hold
the rcu_node structure's ->lock when checking for holdout CPUs, setting
TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP, and invoking tick_dep_set_cpu(), thus preventing
this race.
Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
index 249c2967d9e6c..7cc4856da0817 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
@@ -594,6 +594,7 @@ static void synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait(void)
struct rcu_data *rdp;
struct rcu_node *rnp;
struct rcu_node *rnp_root = rcu_get_root();
+ unsigned long flags;
trace_rcu_exp_grace_period(rcu_state.name, rcu_exp_gp_seq_endval(), TPS("startwait"));
jiffies_stall = rcu_exp_jiffies_till_stall_check();
@@ -602,17 +603,17 @@ static void synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait(void)
if (synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait_once(1))
return;
rcu_for_each_leaf_node(rnp) {
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
mask = READ_ONCE(rnp->expmask);
for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, mask) {
rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu);
if (rdp->rcu_forced_tick_exp)
continue;
rdp->rcu_forced_tick_exp = true;
- preempt_disable();
if (cpu_online(cpu))
tick_dep_set_cpu(cpu, TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU_EXP);
- preempt_enable();
}
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
}
j = READ_ONCE(jiffies_till_first_fqs);
if (synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait_once(j + HZ))
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-21 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-20 11:25 Zqiang
2022-12-21 20:08 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2022-12-22 9:48 ` Zhang, Qiang1
2022-12-22 15:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-12-31 18:25 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-12-31 19:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-01 9:41 ` Zhang, Qiang1
2023-01-03 12:13 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20221221200849.GG4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qiang1.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=quic_neeraju@quicinc.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.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®