From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: rcu@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, Sunho Park <shpark061104@gmail.com>,
syzbot+d4faf7db59e11f6fd1ab@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 09/19] srcu: Fix WARN_ON() for rcu_segcblist_n_cbs() in cleanup_srcu_struct()
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 17:35:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260919003521.3134552-9-paulmck@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13d6be93-8d9d-47a2-beb0-99c8a90938d4@paulmck-laptop>
From: Sunho Park <shpark061104@gmail.com>
The WARN_ON() added by commit 78a38cbf6f20 ("srcu: Queue sdp->work
when the delay timer is successfully deleted") uses rcu_segcblist_n_cbs()
to detect callbacks that srcu_barrier() failed to wait for. However, the
->len counter is decremented only at the end of srcu_invoke_callbacks(),
after the invoking loop has finished. Since srcu_barrier() can return
right after the barrier callback is invoked, cleanup_srcu_struct() can see
a non-zero n_cbs even though the cblist is already physically empty,
falsely triggering the WARN_ON() together with a still-pending delay_work
timer.
This can be triggered as follows, as seen in the syzbot report against
kvm_destroy_vm() -> cleanup_srcu_struct(&kvm->srcu):
1. call_srcu(&kvm->srcu, &bus->rcu, __free_bus) starts SRCU grace
period GP1.
2. GP1 ends: a delay timer is armed and sdp->work is queued, but
sdp->work has not run yet.
3. Another call_srcu(&kvm->srcu, &bus->rcu, __free_bus) call invokes
srcu_segcblist_advance(), which moves the GP1 callback to
RCU_DONE_TAIL, and starts SRCU grace period GP2.
4. srcu_barrier() is called. It queues its barrier callback after the
GP2 callback and waits for srcu_invoke_callbacks() to invoke it.
5. GP2 ends: another delay timer is armed, and the sdp->work queued in
step 2 begins to run. Its srcu_invoke_callbacks() call invokes
srcu_segcblist_advance() again, moving the GP2 and barrier callbacks
to RCU_DONE_TAIL as well, and then invokes all of them. However,
rcu_segcblist_add_len(), which updates srcu_cblist's ->len, has not
run yet at this point.
6. srcu_barrier() returns once its callback has been invoked, and
cleanup_srcu_struct() starts running. It finds the delay timer
armed in step 5 still pending and srcu_cblist's ->len still
non-zero (because step 5 has not reached rcu_segcblist_add_len()
yet), and WARN_ON() fires even though every callback has actually
been invoked.
Use rcu_segcblist_empty(), which checks the actual head of the cblist,
instead of rcu_segcblist_n_cbs(), which checks the racy ->len counter.
Callbacks that have genuinely not been invoked yet still leave the list
non-empty, so the WARN_ON() still catches callers that skip srcu_barrier()
or queue callbacks after it.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rcu/e6350377085ddd85d6ef00d8e9a67bd50c762d3c@linux.dev/T/#t
Reported-by: syzbot+d4faf7db59e11f6fd1ab@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=d4faf7db59e11f6fd1ab
Fixes: 78a38cbf6f20 ("srcu: Queue sdp->work when the delay timer is successfully deleted")
Suggested-by: Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: Sunho Park <shpark061104@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
---
kernel/rcu/srcutree.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
index 6625420cfb43..64081c8eacc8 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
@@ -787,7 +787,7 @@ void cleanup_srcu_struct(struct srcu_struct *ssp)
// Call srcu_barrier() before this cleanup_srcu_struct()
// to avoid triggering this WARN_ON().
if (WARN_ON(timer_delete_sync(&sdp->delay_work) &&
- rcu_segcblist_n_cbs(&sdp->srcu_cblist)) &&
+ !rcu_segcblist_empty(&sdp->srcu_cblist)) &&
rcu_cpu_beenfullyonline(sdp->cpu))
queue_work_on(sdp->cpu, rcu_gp_wq, &sdp->work);
flush_work(&sdp->work);
--
2.40.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-19 0:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-19 0:35 [PATCH 0/19] Add atomic SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 01/19] srcutiny: Make a Tiny SRCU grace period imply an RCU grace period Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 02/19] srcutree: Suppress srcu_advance_state() mutex_lock in atomic Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 03/19] srcutree: Suppress to-big transition for atomic SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 04/19] srcutree: Add an atomic Tree SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 05/19] srcutiny: Add an atomic Tiny SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 06/19] rcutorture: Add support for testing synchronize_srcu_atomic() Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 07/19] srcutree: Disable preemption across synchronize_srcu_atomic() Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 08/19] srcu: Use IRQ_WORK_INIT_HARD for srcu's irq_work Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 10/19] srcutree: Warn if Tiny SRCU readers are preempted Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 11/19] srcutree: Explicitly note DEFINE_SRCU() needs for srcu_barrier() Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 12/19] rcutorture: Add atomic-SRCU support to torture.sh Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 13/19] srcutree: Add reader-free fastpath to synchronize_srcu_atomic() Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 14/19] srcutree: Skip callback scheduling for atomic SRCU grace periods Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 15/19] srcutree: Remove srcu_barrier() sleep for atomic SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 16/19] srcu: Restrict atomic-SRCU non_block annotation to task context Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 17/19] srcutree: Make init_srcu_struct_atomic() prevent transition to big Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 18/19] srcutree: Don't transition atomic SRCU to big in srcu_gp_end() Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-19 0:35 ` [PATCH 19/19] srcutree: Skip torture to-big transition for atomic SRCU Paul E. McKenney
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=20260919003521.3134552-9-paulmck@kernel.org \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shpark061104@gmail.com \
--cc=syzbot+d4faf7db59e11f6fd1ab@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
/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®