* [PATCH] kprobes: Use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude in kprobe_optimizer
@ 2024-01-17 6:16 Chen Zhongjin
2024-01-17 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Chen Zhongjin @ 2024-01-17 6:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-trace-kernel
Cc: chenzhongjin, yangjihong1, naveen.n.rao, anil.s.keshavamurthy,
davem, paulmck, mhiramat, akpm, tglx, peterz, pmladek, dianders,
npiggin, mpe, jkl820.git, juerg.haefliger, rick.p.edgecombe,
eric.devolder, mic
There is a deadlock scenario in kprobe_optimizer():
pid A pid B pid C
kprobe_optimizer() do_exit() perf_kprobe_init()
mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex) exit_tasks_rcu_start() mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex)
synchronize_rcu_tasks() zap_pid_ns_processes() // waiting kprobe_mutex
// waiting tasks_rcu_exit_srcu kernel_wait4()
// waiting pid C exit
To avoid this deadlock loop, use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() in kprobe_optimizer()
rather than synchronize_rcu_tasks(). synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() can also promise
that all preempted tasks have scheduled, but it will not wait tasks_rcu_exit_srcu.
Signed-off-by: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>
---
arch/Kconfig | 2 +-
kernel/kprobes.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig
index f4b210ab0612..dc6a18854017 100644
--- a/arch/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/Kconfig
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ config STATIC_CALL_SELFTEST
config OPTPROBES
def_bool y
depends on KPROBES && HAVE_OPTPROBES
- select TASKS_RCU if PREEMPTION
+ select TASKS_RUDE_RCU
config KPROBES_ON_FTRACE
def_bool y
diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
index d5a0ee40bf66..09056ae50c58 100644
--- a/kernel/kprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
@@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work)
* Note that on non-preemptive kernel, this is transparently converted
* to synchronoze_sched() to wait for all interrupts to have completed.
*/
- synchronize_rcu_tasks();
+ synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude();
/* Step 3: Optimize kprobes after quiesence period */
do_optimize_kprobes();
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kprobes: Use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude in kprobe_optimizer
2024-01-17 6:16 [PATCH] kprobes: Use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude in kprobe_optimizer Chen Zhongjin
@ 2024-01-17 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
2024-01-18 14:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2024-01-17 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chen Zhongjin
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-trace-kernel, yangjihong1, naveen.n.rao,
anil.s.keshavamurthy, davem, paulmck, mhiramat, tglx, peterz,
pmladek, dianders, npiggin, mpe, jkl820.git, juerg.haefliger,
rick.p.edgecombe, eric.devolder, mic
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 06:16:36 +0000 Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com> wrote:
> There is a deadlock scenario in kprobe_optimizer():
>
> pid A pid B pid C
> kprobe_optimizer() do_exit() perf_kprobe_init()
> mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex) exit_tasks_rcu_start() mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex)
> synchronize_rcu_tasks() zap_pid_ns_processes() // waiting kprobe_mutex
> // waiting tasks_rcu_exit_srcu kernel_wait4()
> // waiting pid C exit
>
> To avoid this deadlock loop, use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() in kprobe_optimizer()
> rather than synchronize_rcu_tasks(). synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() can also promise
> that all preempted tasks have scheduled, but it will not wait tasks_rcu_exit_srcu.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>
Thanks. Should we backport this fix into earlier kernels? If so, are
we able to identify a suitable Fixes: target?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kprobes: Use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude in kprobe_optimizer
2024-01-17 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2024-01-18 14:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2024-01-18 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Chen Zhongjin, linux-kernel, linux-trace-kernel, yangjihong1,
naveen.n.rao, anil.s.keshavamurthy, davem, mhiramat, tglx,
peterz, pmladek, dianders, npiggin, mpe, jkl820.git,
juerg.haefliger, rick.p.edgecombe, eric.devolder, mic
On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 12:31:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 06:16:36 +0000 Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> > There is a deadlock scenario in kprobe_optimizer():
> >
> > pid A pid B pid C
> > kprobe_optimizer() do_exit() perf_kprobe_init()
> > mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex) exit_tasks_rcu_start() mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex)
> > synchronize_rcu_tasks() zap_pid_ns_processes() // waiting kprobe_mutex
> > // waiting tasks_rcu_exit_srcu kernel_wait4()
> > // waiting pid C exit
> >
> > To avoid this deadlock loop, use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() in kprobe_optimizer()
> > rather than synchronize_rcu_tasks(). synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() can also promise
> > that all preempted tasks have scheduled, but it will not wait tasks_rcu_exit_srcu.
Hello, Chen Zhongjin,
Relying on the non-preemptability of the last portion of the do_exit()
function does appear to be the basis for a much better solution than
what we currently have. So at the very least, thank you for the idea!!!
I feel a bit silly for not having thought of it myself. ;-)
However, just invoking synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() will be bad for both
energy efficiency and real-time response. This is due to the fact that
synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() sends an IPI to each and every online CPUs,
almost none of which will be in the non-preemptible tail of do_exit()
at any given time. These additional unnecessary IPIs will drain battery
when they hit idle CPUs and degrade real-time response when they hit
CPUs running aggressive real-time applications. Which might not make
people happy.
So, would you be willing to use RCU's do_exit() hooks and RCU's hook
into the scheduler (either rcu_note_context_switch() or rcu_tasks_qs(),
whichever would work better) maintain a per-CPU variable that is a
pointer to the task in the non-preemptible tail of do_exit() if there
is one or NULL otherwise? This would get us the deadlock-avoidance
simplicity of your underlying idea, while avoiding (almost all of)
the energy-efficiency and real-time-response issues with your patch.
This does require a bit of memory-ordering care, so if you would prefer
that I do the implementation, just let me know.
(The memory-ordering trick is to use "smp_mb(); smp_load_acquire();" to
sample the counter and "smp_store_release(); smp_mb();" to update it.)
Thanx, Paul
> > Signed-off-by: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>
>
> Thanks. Should we backport this fix into earlier kernels? If so, are
> we able to identify a suitable Fixes: target?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-01-18 14:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-01-17 6:16 [PATCH] kprobes: Use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude in kprobe_optimizer Chen Zhongjin
2024-01-17 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
2024-01-18 14:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
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®