All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Zqiang" <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
To: "Sunho Park" <shpark061104@gmail.com>, rcu@vger.kernel.org
Cc: paulmck@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	syzbot+d4faf7db59e11f6fd1ab@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [BUG] srcu: false-positive WARN in cleanup_srcu_struct() after 78a38cbf6f20
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 23:53:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <eb2132ad05cd3804a8f2a170de441d79afa793e9@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9e216978-d884-4d56-b39f-d134f78a4999@gmail.com>

> 
> On 8/26/26 22:13, Zqiang wrote:
> 
> > 
> > In this SRCU_SIZE_SMALL mode, when queue delayed work timer, the cblist is always no-empty.
> >  unless invoke start_poll_synchronize_srcu() to begin SRCU garce period,
> >  otherwise invoke call_srcu() or synchronize_srcu*() will insert callback.
> > 
> Right, every grace period which armed the delay_work timer is started by the real call_srcu(&kvm->srcu, &bus->rcu, __free_bus) in kvm_io_bus_register_dev(). I missed one point: the invoke work which invoked the barrier callbacks is not queued by the nearest end of grace period. It was queued by the timer of a previous end of GP, and it started only after the last GP had ended. Meanwhile the srcu_gp_end() from the last GP armed another timer even though the work was already queued. The timeline is as below:
> 
> 1. call_srcu(&kvm->srcu, &bus->rcu, __free_bus)
> 2. One end of GP comes, arms a timer.
> 3. The timer is fired and an invoke work is queued to rcu_gp_wq. The timer is disabled now.
> 4. Another call_srcu(&kvm->srcu, &bus->rcu, __free_bus)
> 5. srcu_barrier() is called and queues barrier callbacks, waits for srcu_invoke_callbacks() to invoke them.

Based on your description below, the 5.srcu_barrier() did not intercept the callback of 4.call_srcu(),
this means that 4.call_srcu() and 5.srcu_barrier() concurrent calls, or calls after 5.srcu_barrier().

The combination of srcu_barrier() and cleanup_srcu_struct() typically occurs on the module exit path.
srcu_barrier() ensures that all previously inserted callbacks complete,so therefore, theoretically,
there shouldn't be any callbacks left to execute after we finish executing srcu_barrier(). 
and of course, there are also shouldn't be any ongoing or newly started SRCU grace period and the
WARN_ON() in cleanup_srcu_struct() is designed to detect it.

If when the cleanup_srcu_struct() detects an incomplete SRCU grace period or any srcu callbacks
that have not yet been executed, this is a risk that needs to be reported, even if the
cleanup_srcu_struct() can intercept it internally.
 
Therefore, we should investigate this issue to ensure that 5.srcu_barrier() can intercept the step 4 callback.

Thanks
Zqiang


> 6. The end of GP from step 4 comes, arms another timer.
> 7. The invoke work queued in step 3 starts, srcu_invoke_callbacks() is called. It starts invoking callbacks without subtracting the cblist len field. It will call rcu_segcblist_add_len(&sdp->srcu_cblist, -len) after the invoking loop is over.
> When I debugged, there were five __free_bus(the real callbacks) and one barrier callback, so the cblist len field was 6.
> 8. Barrier callback is invoked, still the cblist len field is not subtracted as srcu_invoke_callbacks()'s invoking loop is not over.
> 9. srcu_barrier() wakes up by completion and cleanup_srcu_struct() is called before the timer armed in step 6 expires.
> At this point the cblist is physically empty (head == NULL, all seglen are 0) as all six callbacks have already been invoked. Only the cblist len field is stale(>0).
> 
> Thanks
> Sunho Park
>

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-26 23:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-24 10:56 [BUG] srcu: false-positive WARN in cleanup_srcu_struct() after 78a38cbf6f20 Sunho Park
2026-08-25 12:33 ` Zqiang
2026-08-25 16:50   ` Sunho Park
2026-08-26 13:13     ` Zqiang
2026-08-26 16:03       ` Sunho Park
2026-08-26 23:53         ` Zqiang [this message]
2026-08-27  9:11           ` Sunho Park
2026-08-27 11:13             ` Zqiang
2026-08-27 11:35               ` Zqiang
2026-08-27 12:30                 ` Sunho Park
2026-08-27 12:40                 ` Zqiang
2026-08-27 13:03                   ` Sunho Park
2026-08-27 13:40                     ` Zqiang
2026-08-27 13:41                     ` Zqiang
2026-08-29 23:08                       ` 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=eb2132ad05cd3804a8f2a170de441d79afa793e9@linux.dev \
    --to=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.