mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: drj19981414013@gmail.com
Cc: DAI RENJIE via B4 Relay
	<devnull+drj19981414013.gmail.com@kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Bradley Morgan <include@grrlz.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] resource: fix lost wakeup when waiting for a muxed region
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 11:34:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260821113457.8622c5d35c9aec838490b013@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260821-b4-resource-muxed-lost-wakeup-v1-1-37eb6473a76c@gmail.com>

On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 14:08:17 +0000 DAI RENJIE via B4 Relay <devnull+drj19981414013.gmail.com@kernel.org> wrote:

> From: DAI RENJIE <drj19981414013@gmail.com>
> 
> A task waiting for a muxed region can sleep forever in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
> even though the region it waits for is already free.
> __request_region_locked() queues itself on muxed_resource_wait and drops
> resource_lock before setting TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, while __release_region()
> wakes the queue after dropping the same lock.  A wakeup landing in between
> finds TASK_RUNNING, does not match TASK_NORMAL and is discarded; callers
> hold a muxed region only across a bounded transaction, so no further
> release is coming.  The task is unkillable and its caller never returns.
> 
> The window is one store wide, but an interrupt is enough to hold the waiter
> in it, and the machine this was seen on runs PREEMPT_DYNAMIC in its
> voluntary default.  Since v6.11 spd5118 exports the DDR5 sensors of AMD
> boards through i2c-piix4, which takes a muxed region per SMBus transaction;
> a third of the in-tree users of request_muxed_region() are hwmon drivers,
> so reading a world-readable attribute is all an unprivileged user needs to
> drive the contention.  The blocked task sleeps holding the i2c adapter bus
> lock, and 27 more piled up behind it.
> 
> Fix it by setting the task state before dropping resource_lock, as
> prepare_to_wait() does: the releasing side needs resource_lock to unlink
> the resource, so it cannot reach the wakeup before the state is published.
> 
> Fixes: 8b6d043b7ee2 ("resource: shared I/O region support")

16 years ago.

> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-5
> Signed-off-by: DAI RENJIE <drj19981414013@gmail.com>
> ---
> Reproduced by building a kernel with the two orderings selectable at
> runtime and a 2ms delay inside the window.  Switching only that knob, a
> two-thread barriered reproducer loses the wakeup 200 times out of 200
> before the fix and 0 out of 200 after it; without the delay it goes 20000
> times through the wait path and loses none.
> ---
>  kernel/resource.c | 2 +-

Bjorn, please consider a MAINTAINERS entry?

> --- a/kernel/resource.c
> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
> @@ -1350,8 +1350,8 @@ static int __request_region_locked(struct resource *res, struct resource *parent
>  		}
>  		if (conflict->flags & flags & IORESOURCE_MUXED) {
>  			add_wait_queue(&muxed_resource_wait, &wait);
> -			write_unlock(&resource_lock);
>  			set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> +			write_unlock(&resource_lock);
>  			schedule();
>  			remove_wait_queue(&muxed_resource_wait, &wait);
>  			write_lock(&resource_lock);

Yup, that's a basic waitqueue usage bug.  


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-21 18:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-21 14:08 DAI RENJIE via B4 Relay
2026-08-21 17:42 ` Bradley Morgan
2026-08-21 18:34 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-08-21 19:13   ` Bradley Morgan
2026-08-26 19:42   ` Bjorn Helgaas

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=20260821113457.8622c5d35c9aec838490b013@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=devnull+drj19981414013.gmail.com@kernel.org \
    --cc=drj19981414013@gmail.com \
    --cc=include@grrlz.net \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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®