summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2017-02-23locking/rtmutex: Prevent dequeue vs. unlock raceThomas Gleixner
commit dbb26055defd03d59f678cb5f2c992abe05b064a upstream. David reported a futex/rtmutex state corruption. It's caused by the following problem: CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 l->owner=T1 rt_mutex_lock(l) lock(l->wait_lock) l->owner = T1 | HAS_WAITERS; enqueue(T2) boost() unlock(l->wait_lock) schedule() rt_mutex_lock(l) lock(l->wait_lock) l->owner = T1 | HAS_WAITERS; enqueue(T3) boost() unlock(l->wait_lock) schedule() signal(->T2) signal(->T3) lock(l->wait_lock) dequeue(T2) deboost() unlock(l->wait_lock) lock(l->wait_lock) dequeue(T3) ===> wait list is now empty deboost() unlock(l->wait_lock) lock(l->wait_lock) fixup_rt_mutex_waiters() if (wait_list_empty(l)) { owner = l->owner & ~HAS_WAITERS; l->owner = owner ==> l->owner = T1 } lock(l->wait_lock) rt_mutex_unlock(l) fixup_rt_mutex_waiters() if (wait_list_empty(l)) { owner = l->owner & ~HAS_WAITERS; cmpxchg(l->owner, T1, NULL) ===> Success (l->owner = NULL) l->owner = owner ==> l->owner = T1 } That means the problem is caused by fixup_rt_mutex_waiters() which does the RMW to clear the waiters bit unconditionally when there are no waiters in the rtmutexes rbtree. This can be fatal: A concurrent unlock can release the rtmutex in the fastpath because the waiters bit is not set. If the cmpxchg() gets in the middle of the RMW operation then the previous owner, which just unlocked the rtmutex is set as the owner again when the write takes place after the successfull cmpxchg(). The solution is rather trivial: verify that the owner member of the rtmutex has the waiters bit set before clearing it. This does not require a cmpxchg() or other atomic operations because the waiters bit can only be set and cleared with the rtmutex wait_lock held. It's also safe against the fast path unlock attempt. The unlock attempt via cmpxchg() will either see the bit set and take the slowpath or see the bit cleared and release it atomically in the fastpath. It's remarkable that the test program provided by David triggers on ARM64 and MIPS64 really quick, but it refuses to reproduce on x86-64, while the problem exists there as well. That refusal might explain that this got not discovered earlier despite the bug existing from day one of the rtmutex implementation more than 10 years ago. Thanks to David for meticulously instrumenting the code and providing the information which allowed to decode this subtle problem. Reported-by: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com> Tested-by: David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Fixes: 23f78d4a03c5 ("[PATCH] pi-futex: rt mutex core") Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161130210030.351136722@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> [bwh: Backported to 3.16: use ACCESS_ONCE() instead of {READ,WRITE}_ONCE()] Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
2015-05-28sched: Handle priority boosted tasks proper in setscheduler()Thomas Gleixner
commit 0782e63bc6fe7e2d3408d250df11d388b7799c6b upstream. Ronny reported that the following scenario is not handled correctly: T1 (prio = 10) lock(rtmutex); T2 (prio = 20) lock(rtmutex) boost T1 T1 (prio = 20) sys_set_scheduler(prio = 30) T1 prio = 30 .... sys_set_scheduler(prio = 10) T1 prio = 30 The last step is wrong as T1 should now be back at prio 20. Commit c365c292d059 ("sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()") only handles the case where a boosted tasks tries to lower its priority. Fix it by taking the new effective priority into account for the decision whether a change of the priority is required. Reported-by: Ronny Meeus <ronny.meeus@gmail.com> Tested-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> Fixes: c365c292d059 ("sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()") Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.DEB.2.11.1505051806060.4225@nanos Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> [ luis: backported to 3.16: adjusted context ] Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com>
2015-03-02locking/rtmutex: Avoid a NULL pointer dereference on deadlockSebastian Andrzej Siewior
commit 8d1e5a1a1ccf5ae9d8a5a0ee7960202ccb0c5429 upstream. With task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() returning early -EDEADLK we never add the waiter to the waitqueue. Later, we try to remove it via remove_waiter() and go boom in rt_mutex_top_waiter() because rb_entry() gives a NULL pointer. ( Tested on v3.18-RT where rtmutex is used for regular mutex and I tried to get one twice in a row. ) Not sure when this started but I guess 397335f004f4 ("rtmutex: Fix deadlock detector for real") or commit 3d5c9340d194 ("rtmutex: Handle deadlock detection smarter"). Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1424187823-19600-1-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> [ luis: backported to 3.16: adjusted context ] Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com>
2014-06-16rtmutex: Plug slow unlock raceThomas Gleixner
When the rtmutex fast path is enabled the slow unlock function can create the following situation: spin_lock(foo->m->wait_lock); foo->m->owner = NULL; rt_mutex_lock(foo->m); <-- fast path free = atomic_dec_and_test(foo->refcnt); rt_mutex_unlock(foo->m); <-- fast path if (free) kfree(foo); spin_unlock(foo->m->wait_lock); <--- Use after free. Plug the race by changing the slow unlock to the following scheme: while (!rt_mutex_has_waiters(m)) { /* Clear the waiters bit in m->owner */ clear_rt_mutex_waiters(m); owner = rt_mutex_owner(m); spin_unlock(m->wait_lock); if (cmpxchg(m->owner, owner, 0) == owner) return; spin_lock(m->wait_lock); } So in case of a new waiter incoming while the owner tries the slow path unlock we have two situations: unlock(wait_lock); lock(wait_lock); cmpxchg(p, owner, 0) == owner mark_rt_mutex_waiters(lock); acquire(lock); Or: unlock(wait_lock); lock(wait_lock); mark_rt_mutex_waiters(lock); cmpxchg(p, owner, 0) != owner enqueue_waiter(); unlock(wait_lock); lock(wait_lock); wakeup_next waiter(); unlock(wait_lock); lock(wait_lock); acquire(lock); If the fast path is disabled, then the simple m->owner = NULL; unlock(m->wait_lock); is sufficient as all access to m->owner is serialized via m->wait_lock; Also document and clarify the wakeup_next_waiter function as suggested by Oleg Nesterov. Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140611183852.937945560@linutronix.de Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2014-06-07rtmutex: Detect changes in the pi lock chainThomas Gleixner
When we walk the lock chain, we drop all locks after each step. So the lock chain can change under us before we reacquire the locks. That's harmless in principle as we just follow the wrong lock path. But it can lead to a false positive in the dead lock detection logic: T0 holds L0 T0 blocks on L1 held by T1 T1 blocks on L2 held by T2 T2 blocks on L3 held by T3 T4 blocks on L4 held by T4 Now we walk the chain lock T1 -> lock L2 -> adjust L2 -> unlock T1 -> lock T2 -> adjust T2 -> drop locks T2 times out and blocks on L0 Now we continue: lock T2 -> lock L0 -> deadlock detected, but it's not a deadlock at all. Brad tried to work around that in the deadlock detection logic itself, but the more I looked at it the less I liked it, because it's crystal ball magic after the fact. We actually can detect a chain change very simple: lock T1 -> lock L2 -> adjust L2 -> unlock T1 -> lock T2 -> adjust T2 -> next_lock = T2->pi_blocked_on->lock; drop locks T2 times out and blocks on L0 Now we continue: lock T2 -> if (next_lock != T2->pi_blocked_on->lock) return; So if we detect that T2 is now blocked on a different lock we stop the chain walk. That's also correct in the following scenario: lock T1 -> lock L2 -> adjust L2 -> unlock T1 -> lock T2 -> adjust T2 -> next_lock = T2->pi_blocked_on->lock; drop locks T3 times out and drops L3 T2 acquires L3 and blocks on L4 now Now we continue: lock T2 -> if (next_lock != T2->pi_blocked_on->lock) return; We don't have to follow up the chain at that point, because T2 propagated our priority up to T4 already. [ Folded a cleanup patch from peterz ] Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reported-by: Brad Mouring <bmouring@ni.com> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140605152801.930031935@linutronix.de Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
2014-06-07rtmutex: Handle deadlock detection smarterThomas Gleixner
Even in the case when deadlock detection is not requested by the caller, we can detect deadlocks. Right now the code stops the lock chain walk and keeps the waiter enqueued, even on itself. Silly not to yell when such a scenario is detected and to keep the waiter enqueued. Return -EDEADLK unconditionally and handle it at the call sites. The futex calls return -EDEADLK. The non futex ones dequeue the waiter, throw a warning and put the task into a schedule loop. Tagged for stable as it makes the code more robust. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Brad Mouring <bmouring@ni.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140605152801.836501969@linutronix.de Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2014-05-28rtmutex: Fix deadlock detector for realThomas Gleixner
The current deadlock detection logic does not work reliably due to the following early exit path: /* * Drop out, when the task has no waiters. Note, * top_waiter can be NULL, when we are in the deboosting * mode! */ if (top_waiter && (!task_has_pi_waiters(task) || top_waiter != task_top_pi_waiter(task))) goto out_unlock_pi; So this not only exits when the task has no waiters, it also exits unconditionally when the current waiter is not the top priority waiter of the task. So in a nested locking scenario, it might abort the lock chain walk and therefor miss a potential deadlock. Simple fix: Continue the chain walk, when deadlock detection is enabled. We also avoid the whole enqueue, if we detect the deadlock right away (A-A). It's an optimization, but also prevents that another waiter who comes in after the detection and before the task has undone the damage observes the situation and detects the deadlock and returns -EDEADLOCK, which is wrong as the other task is not in a deadlock situation. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140522031949.725272460@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2014-02-22sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()Thomas Gleixner
If a PI boosted task policy/priority is modified by a setscheduler() call we unconditionally dequeue and requeue the task if it is on the runqueue even if the new priority is lower than the current effective boosted priority. This can result in undesired reordering of the priority bucket list. If the new priority is less or equal than the current effective we just store the new parameters in the task struct and leave the scheduler class and the runqueue untouched. This is handled when the task deboosts itself. Only if the new priority is higher than the effective boosted priority we apply the change immediately. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> [ Rebase ontop of v3.14-rc1. ] Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Cc: Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1391803122-4425-7-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2014-01-13sched/deadline: Add SCHED_DEADLINE inheritance logicDario Faggioli
Some method to deal with rt-mutexes and make sched_dl interact with the current PI-coded is needed, raising all but trivial issues, that needs (according to us) to be solved with some restructuring of the pi-code (i.e., going toward a proxy execution-ish implementation). This is under development, in the meanwhile, as a temporary solution, what this commits does is: - ensure a pi-lock owner with waiters is never throttled down. Instead, when it runs out of runtime, it immediately gets replenished and it's deadline is postponed; - the scheduling parameters (relative deadline and default runtime) used for that replenishments --during the whole period it holds the pi-lock-- are the ones of the waiting task with earliest deadline. Acting this way, we provide some kind of boosting to the lock-owner, still by using the existing (actually, slightly modified by the previous commit) pi-architecture. We would stress the fact that this is only a surely needed, all but clean solution to the problem. In the end it's only a way to re-start discussion within the community. So, as always, comments, ideas, rants, etc.. are welcome! :-) Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com> [ Added !RT_MUTEXES build fix. ] Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1383831828-15501-11-git-send-email-juri.lelli@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2014-01-13rtmutex: Turn the plist into an rb-treePeter Zijlstra
Turn the pi-chains from plist to rb-tree, in the rt_mutex code, and provide a proper comparison function for -deadline and -priority tasks. This is done mainly because: - classical prio field of the plist is just an int, which might not be enough for representing a deadline; - manipulating such a list would become O(nr_deadline_tasks), which might be to much, as the number of -deadline task increases. Therefore, an rb-tree is used, and tasks are queued in it according to the following logic: - among two -priority (i.e., SCHED_BATCH/OTHER/RR/FIFO) tasks, the one with the higher (lower, actually!) prio wins; - among a -priority and a -deadline task, the latter always wins; - among two -deadline tasks, the one with the earliest deadline wins. Queueing and dequeueing functions are changed accordingly, for both the list of a task's pi-waiters and the list of tasks blocked on a pi-lock. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com> Signed-off-again-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1383831828-15501-10-git-send-email-juri.lelli@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2013-11-06locking: Move the rtmutex code to kernel/locking/Peter Zijlstra
Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-p9ijt8div0hwldexwfm4nlhj@git.kernel.org [ Fixed build failure in kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h. ] Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>