From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.5 1/5] locking/ww_mutex/test: Fix potential workqueue corruption
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2023 18:06:38 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231106230651.3734359-1-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
From: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
[ Upstream commit bccdd808902f8c677317cec47c306e42b93b849e ]
In some cases running with the test-ww_mutex code, I was seeing
odd behavior where sometimes it seemed flush_workqueue was
returning before all the work threads were finished.
Often this would cause strange crashes as the mutexes would be
freed while they were being used.
Looking at the code, there is a lifetime problem as the
controlling thread that spawns the work allocates the
"struct stress" structures that are passed to the workqueue
threads. Then when the workqueue threads are finished,
they free the stress struct that was passed to them.
Unfortunately the workqueue work_struct node is in the stress
struct. Which means the work_struct is freed before the work
thread returns and while flush_workqueue is waiting.
It seems like a better idea to have the controlling thread
both allocate and free the stress structures, so that we can
be sure we don't corrupt the workqueue by freeing the structure
prematurely.
So this patch reworks the test to do so, and with this change
I no longer see the early flush_workqueue returns.
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230922043616.19282-3-jstultz@google.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c | 20 ++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c b/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c
index 93cca6e698600..7c5a8f05497f2 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/test-ww_mutex.c
@@ -466,7 +466,6 @@ static void stress_inorder_work(struct work_struct *work)
} while (!time_after(jiffies, stress->timeout));
kfree(order);
- kfree(stress);
}
struct reorder_lock {
@@ -531,7 +530,6 @@ static void stress_reorder_work(struct work_struct *work)
list_for_each_entry_safe(ll, ln, &locks, link)
kfree(ll);
kfree(order);
- kfree(stress);
}
static void stress_one_work(struct work_struct *work)
@@ -552,8 +550,6 @@ static void stress_one_work(struct work_struct *work)
break;
}
} while (!time_after(jiffies, stress->timeout));
-
- kfree(stress);
}
#define STRESS_INORDER BIT(0)
@@ -564,15 +560,24 @@ static void stress_one_work(struct work_struct *work)
static int stress(int nlocks, int nthreads, unsigned int flags)
{
struct ww_mutex *locks;
- int n;
+ struct stress *stress_array;
+ int n, count;
locks = kmalloc_array(nlocks, sizeof(*locks), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!locks)
return -ENOMEM;
+ stress_array = kmalloc_array(nthreads, sizeof(*stress_array),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!stress_array) {
+ kfree(locks);
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+
for (n = 0; n < nlocks; n++)
ww_mutex_init(&locks[n], &ww_class);
+ count = 0;
for (n = 0; nthreads; n++) {
struct stress *stress;
void (*fn)(struct work_struct *work);
@@ -596,9 +601,7 @@ static int stress(int nlocks, int nthreads, unsigned int flags)
if (!fn)
continue;
- stress = kmalloc(sizeof(*stress), GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!stress)
- break;
+ stress = &stress_array[count++];
INIT_WORK(&stress->work, fn);
stress->locks = locks;
@@ -613,6 +616,7 @@ static int stress(int nlocks, int nthreads, unsigned int flags)
for (n = 0; n < nlocks; n++)
ww_mutex_destroy(&locks[n]);
+ kfree(stress_array);
kfree(locks);
return 0;
--
2.42.0
next reply other threads:[~2023-11-06 23:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-06 23:06 Sasha Levin [this message]
2023-11-06 23:06 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.5 2/5] x86/amd_nb: Add AMD Family MI300 PCI IDs Sasha Levin
2023-11-06 23:06 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.5 3/5] btrfs: abort transaction on generation mismatch when marking eb as dirty Sasha Levin
2023-11-06 23:06 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.5 4/5] lib/generic-radix-tree.c: Don't overflow in peek() Sasha Levin
2023-11-06 23:06 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.5 5/5] x86/retpoline: Make sure there are no unconverted return thunks due to KCSAN Sasha Levin
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=20231106230651.3734359-1-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=will@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
Powered by JetHome