From: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] futex: remove rw parameter from get_futex_key()
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:21:00 +0000 (GMT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1001051108150.26884@sister.anvils> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100105162633.45A2.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > Hm. probably we need to discuss more.
> > >
> > > Firstly, if we assume current glibc implimentation, you are right,
> > > we can assume userland always initialize the page explicitly before using
> > > futex. then we never seen zero page in futex.
> > >
> > > but, I don't think futex itself assume it now. at least man page
> > > doesn't describe such limilation. so, if you prefer bail and man fix,
> > > I'm acceptable maybe.
> >
> > Here's another worry with the current futex implementation,
> > which might help me to decide which way to jump on the ZERO_PAGE.
> >
> > Originally, a futex on a MAP_PRIVATE (!VM_MAYSHARE) area was necessarily
> > FUT_OFF_MMSHARED. Nowadays, with the get_user_pages_fast implementation,
> > we have no idea whether the vma is VM_MAYSHARE or not. So if a futex is
> > placed in a private area backed by a file, then it could be regarded as
> > FUT_OFF_INODE at futex_wait() time, but FUT_OFF_MMSHARED at futex_wake()
> > time.
>
> very true!
>
>
> > Perhaps that's no problem at all, it's a long time since I was involved
> > with futexes, I think you and Peter will grasp the consequences quicker
> > than I shall.
> >
> > But it seems no more improbable than the ZERO_PAGE case: some app
> > might place its futexes in the .data section of the executable,
> > which is a private mapping of the executable file.
> >
> > If this case is also an issue, then perhaps we just need to update
> > the man page to say that whatever is responsible for initializing a
> > futex does need to write to it (or the page it's in) before it's used,
> > otherwise behaviour is undefined. (But we should then use the -EFAULT
> > patch above, we'd all prefer an error to busylooping.)
>
> I have a question. Why can't we use write mode get_user_pages_fast()?
> I mean glibc always mekes write access before calling futex. it mean
> write mode get_user_pages() doesn't mekes cow on practical usage.
>
> Following patch is implemented such policy. What do you think?
It crossed my mind to do it that way too - honest!
I pushed it away thinking that some app may sometimes be using
mprotect PROT_READ or PROT_NONE over these areas, for one reason
or another - perhaps debugging or self-monitoring.
But I've no experience of futex use at all: if futexperts think it's
reasonable always to get_futex_key() for writing, then that is much
the neatest way to deal with both zero page and private file cases.
Over to the experts...
Hugh
>
> From c3e2dfdff84b9b720e646fd6dd3c38fff293c7e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:33:00 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] futex: remove rw parameter from get_futex_key()
>
> Currently, futex have two problem.
>
> A) current futex doesn't handle private file mappings properly.
>
> get_futex_key() use PageAnon() to distinguish file and anon. it can
> makes following bad scenario.
>
> 1) thread-A call futex(private-mapping, FUTEX_WAIT). it makes to
> sleep on file mapping object.
> 2) thread-B write a variable and it makes cow.
> 3) thread-B call futex(private-mapping, FUTEX_WAKE). it wake up
> sleeped thread on the anonymous page. (but it's nothing)
>
> following testcase reproduce this issue.
>
> actual result)
> FUTEX_WAIT thread never wake up.
>
> expect result)
> FUTEX_WAIT thread wake up by FUTEX_WAKE.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <syscall.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <errno.h>
> #include <linux/futex.h>
> #include <pthread.h>
>
> char pad[4096] = {1};
> int val = 1;
> char pad2[4096] = {1};
>
> void * futex_wait(void *arg)
> {
> int ret;
>
> fprintf(stderr, "futex wait\n");
> ret = syscall( SYS_futex, &val, FUTEX_WAIT, 1, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> if (ret != 0 && errno != EWOULDBLOCK) {
> perror("futex error.\n");
> exit(1);
> }
> fprintf(stderr, "futex_wait: ret = %d, errno = %d\n", ret, errno);
>
> return NULL;
> }
>
> int main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
> pthread_t thr;
> int ret;
>
> ret = pthread_create(&thr, NULL, futex_wait, NULL);
> if (ret < 0) {
> fprintf(stderr, "pthread_create error\n");
> exit(1);
> }
>
> sleep(10);
>
> fprintf(stderr, "futex wake\n");
> val = 2;
> ret = syscall( SYS_futex, &val, FUTEX_WAKE, 1, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> fprintf(stderr, "futex_wake: ret = %d, errno = %d\n", ret, errno);
>
> fprintf(stderr, "join\n");
> pthread_join(thr, NULL);
>
> return 0;
> }
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> B) current futex doesn't handle zero page properly.
>
> read mode get_user_pages() can return zero page. but current futex code doesn't
> handle it at all. Then, zero page makes infinite loop internally.
>
> following testcase can reproduce this issue.
>
> actual result)
> FUTEX_WAIT never return and waste cpu time 100%.
>
> expected result)
> FUTEX_WAIT return immediately.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
> #include <syscall.h>
> #include <sys/time.h>
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <fcntl.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <errno.h>
> #include <linux/futex.h>
> #include <pthread.h>
>
> int main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
> long page_size;
> int ret;
> void *buf;
>
> page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>
> buf = mmap(NULL, page_size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, 0, 0);
> if (buf == (void *)-1) {
> perror("mmap error.\n");
> exit(1);
> }
>
> fprintf(stderr, "futex wait\n");
> ret = syscall( SYS_futex, buf, FUTEX_WAIT, 1, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> if (ret != 0 && errno != EWOULDBLOCK) {
> perror("futex error.\n");
> exit(1);
> }
> fprintf(stderr, "futex_wait: ret = %d, errno = %d\n", ret, errno);
>
> return 0;
> }
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The solution is to use write mode get_user_page() always for page lookup.
> It prevent to lookup both file page of private mappings and zero page.
>
> performance concern:
>
> Probaly very little. because glibc always initialize variables for futex
> before to call futex(). It mean glibc user never seen the overhead of this
> patch.
>
> compatibility concern:
>
> This patch have few compatibility break. After this patch, FUTEX_WAIT require
> writable access to futex variables (read-only mappings makes EFAULT).
> But practically it's no problem. again glibc always initalize variables for futex
> explicitly. nobody use read-only mappings.
>
> Reported-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> kernel/futex.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
> index 8e3c3ff..d9b3a22 100644
> --- a/kernel/futex.c
> +++ b/kernel/futex.c
> @@ -203,8 +203,6 @@ static void drop_futex_key_refs(union futex_key *key)
> * @uaddr: virtual address of the futex
> * @fshared: 0 for a PROCESS_PRIVATE futex, 1 for PROCESS_SHARED
> * @key: address where result is stored.
> - * @rw: mapping needs to be read/write (values: VERIFY_READ,
> - * VERIFY_WRITE)
> *
> * Returns a negative error code or 0
> * The key words are stored in *key on success.
> @@ -216,7 +214,7 @@ static void drop_futex_key_refs(union futex_key *key)
> * lock_page() might sleep, the caller should not hold a spinlock.
> */
> static int
> -get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key, int rw)
> +get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key)
> {
> unsigned long address = (unsigned long)uaddr;
> struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;
> @@ -239,7 +237,7 @@ get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key, int rw)
> * but access_ok() should be faster than find_vma()
> */
> if (!fshared) {
> - if (unlikely(!access_ok(rw, uaddr, sizeof(u32))))
> + if (unlikely(!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, uaddr, sizeof(u32))))
> return -EFAULT;
> key->private.mm = mm;
> key->private.address = address;
> @@ -248,7 +246,7 @@ get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key, int rw)
> }
>
> again:
> - err = get_user_pages_fast(address, 1, rw == VERIFY_WRITE, &page);
> + err = get_user_pages_fast(address, 1, 1, &page);
> if (err < 0)
> return err;
>
> @@ -867,7 +865,7 @@ static int futex_wake(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, int nr_wake, u32 bitset)
> if (!bitset)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key, VERIFY_READ);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out;
>
> @@ -913,10 +911,10 @@ futex_wake_op(u32 __user *uaddr1, int fshared, u32 __user *uaddr2,
> int ret, op_ret;
>
> retry:
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1, VERIFY_READ);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out;
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2, VERIFY_WRITE);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out_put_key1;
>
> @@ -1175,11 +1173,10 @@ retry:
> pi_state = NULL;
> }
>
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1, VERIFY_READ);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, fshared, &key1);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out;
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2,
> - requeue_pi ? VERIFY_WRITE : VERIFY_READ);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out_put_key1;
>
> @@ -1738,7 +1735,7 @@ static int futex_wait_setup(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 val, int fshared,
> */
> retry:
> q->key = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q->key, VERIFY_READ);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q->key);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> return ret;
>
> @@ -1904,7 +1901,7 @@ static int futex_lock_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared,
> q.requeue_pi_key = NULL;
> retry:
> q.key = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q.key, VERIFY_WRITE);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &q.key);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out;
>
> @@ -2023,7 +2020,7 @@ retry:
> if ((uval & FUTEX_TID_MASK) != task_pid_vnr(current))
> return -EPERM;
>
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key, VERIFY_WRITE);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr, fshared, &key);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out;
>
> @@ -2215,7 +2212,7 @@ static int futex_wait_requeue_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared,
> rt_waiter.task = NULL;
>
> key2 = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
> - ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2, VERIFY_WRITE);
> + ret = get_futex_key(uaddr2, fshared, &key2);
> if (unlikely(ret != 0))
> goto out;
>
> --
> 1.6.5.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-05 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-24 9:29 [PATCH] futex: Fix ZERO_PAGE cause infinite loop KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-24 9:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-12-24 17:15 ` Ulrich Drepper
2009-12-25 1:51 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-30 16:03 ` Hugh Dickins
2010-01-05 7:32 ` [PATCH v2] futex: remove rw parameter from get_futex_key() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-01-05 11:21 ` Hugh Dickins [this message]
2010-01-05 20:41 ` Darren Hart
2010-01-06 2:27 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-01-06 23:14 ` Darren Hart
2010-01-06 23:29 ` Darren Hart
2010-01-13 10:30 ` [tip:core/urgent] futexes: Remove " tip-bot for KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-01-07 6:32 ` [PATCH] mips,mm: Reinstate move_pte optimization KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-01-11 10:15 ` Ralf Baechle
2010-01-05 18:04 ` [PATCH] futex: Fix ZERO_PAGE cause infinite loop Darren Hart
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=alpine.LSU.2.00.1001051108150.26884@sister.anvils \
--to=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=drepper@gmail.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®