lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 3.18 095/145] padata: avoid race in reordering
Date
3.18-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>

commit de5540d088fe97ad583cc7d396586437b32149a5 upstream.

Under extremely heavy uses of padata, crashes occur, and with list
debugging turned on, this happens instead:

[87487.298728] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 882 at lib/list_debug.c:33
__list_add+0xae/0x130
[87487.301868] list_add corruption. prev->next should be next
(ffffb17abfc043d0), but was ffff8dba70872c80. (prev=ffff8dba70872b00).
[87487.339011] [<ffffffff9a53d075>] dump_stack+0x68/0xa3
[87487.342198] [<ffffffff99e119a1>] ? console_unlock+0x281/0x6d0
[87487.345364] [<ffffffff99d6b91f>] __warn+0xff/0x140
[87487.348513] [<ffffffff99d6b9aa>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x4a/0x50
[87487.351659] [<ffffffff9a58b5de>] __list_add+0xae/0x130
[87487.354772] [<ffffffff9add5094>] ? _raw_spin_lock+0x64/0x70
[87487.357915] [<ffffffff99eefd66>] padata_reorder+0x1e6/0x420
[87487.361084] [<ffffffff99ef0055>] padata_do_serial+0xa5/0x120

padata_reorder calls list_add_tail with the list to which its adding
locked, which seems correct:

spin_lock(&squeue->serial.lock);
list_add_tail(&padata->list, &squeue->serial.list);
spin_unlock(&squeue->serial.lock);

This therefore leaves only place where such inconsistency could occur:
if padata->list is added at the same time on two different threads.
This pdata pointer comes from the function call to
padata_get_next(pd), which has in it the following block:

next_queue = per_cpu_ptr(pd->pqueue, cpu);
padata = NULL;
reorder = &next_queue->reorder;
if (!list_empty(&reorder->list)) {
padata = list_entry(reorder->list.next,
struct padata_priv, list);
spin_lock(&reorder->lock);
list_del_init(&padata->list);
atomic_dec(&pd->reorder_objects);
spin_unlock(&reorder->lock);

pd->processed++;

goto out;
}
out:
return padata;

I strongly suspect that the problem here is that two threads can race
on reorder list. Even though the deletion is locked, call to
list_entry is not locked, which means it's feasible that two threads
pick up the same padata object and subsequently call list_add_tail on
them at the same time. The fix is thus be hoist that lock outside of
that block.

Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Acked-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
kernel/padata.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/padata.c
+++ b/kernel/padata.c
@@ -189,19 +189,20 @@ static struct padata_priv *padata_get_ne

reorder = &next_queue->reorder;

+ spin_lock(&reorder->lock);
if (!list_empty(&reorder->list)) {
padata = list_entry(reorder->list.next,
struct padata_priv, list);

- spin_lock(&reorder->lock);
list_del_init(&padata->list);
atomic_dec(&pd->reorder_objects);
- spin_unlock(&reorder->lock);

pd->processed++;

+ spin_unlock(&reorder->lock);
goto out;
}
+ spin_unlock(&reorder->lock);

if (__this_cpu_read(pd->pqueue->cpu_index) == next_queue->cpu_index) {
padata = ERR_PTR(-ENODATA);

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-16 13:09    [W:0.363 / U:3.868 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site