From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, 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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/19] srcu: Fix WARN_ON() for rcu_segcblist_n_cbs() in cleanup_srcu_struct()
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 17:27:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ar2o5yyB-o12pAos@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260919003521.3134552-9-paulmck@kernel.org>
On Fri, Sep 18, 2026, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> 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>
> ---
Is this going to be grabbed for 7.3? It shows up relatively frequently in KVM.
Not so much that it's truly problematic/alarming, but enough that it definitely
stands out.
Tested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-01 0:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ 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 ` [PATCH 09/19] srcu: Fix WARN_ON() for rcu_segcblist_n_cbs() in cleanup_srcu_struct() Paul E. McKenney
2026-10-01 0:27 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2026-10-01 0:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=ar2o5yyB-o12pAos@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@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®