public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
	John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 15:05:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190509130504.GW2623@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <155739797736.28545.2942646931608459049@skylake-alporthouse-com>

On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 11:32:57AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-05-06 08:45:53)
> > +/**
> > + * printk_safe_up - release the semaphore in console_unlock
> > + * @sem: the semaphore to release
> > + *
> > + * Release the semaphore.  Unlike mutexes, up() may be called from any
> > + * context and even by tasks which have never called down().
> > + *
> > + * NOTE: This is a special version of up() for console_unlock only. It is only
> > + * safe if there are no killable, interruptible or timing out down() calls.
> > + */
> > +void printk_safe_up(struct semaphore *sem)
> > +{
> > +       unsigned long flags;
> > +       struct semaphore_waiter *waiter = NULL;
> > +
> > +       raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->lock, flags);
> > +       if (likely(list_empty(&sem->wait_list))) {
> > +               sem->count++;
> > +       } else {
> > +               waiter = list_first_entry(&sem->wait_list,
> > +                                         struct semaphore_waiter, list);
> > +               list_del(&waiter->list);
> > +               waiter->up = true;
> > +       }
> > +       raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->lock, flags);
> > +
> > +       if (waiter)
> > +               wake_up_process(waiter->task);
> 
> From comparing against __down_common() there's a risk here that as soon
> as waiter->up == true, the waiter may complete and make the onstack
> struct semaphore_waiter invalid. If you store waiter->task locally under
> the spinlock that problem is resolved.
> 
> Then there is the issue of an unprotected dereference of the task in
> wake_up_process() -- I think you can wrap this function with
> rcu_read_lock() to keep that safe, and wake_up_process() should be a
> no-op if it races against process termination.

task_struct is not RCU protected, see task_rcu_dereference() for magic.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-09 13:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-02 14:16 [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_trylock more Daniel Vetter
2019-05-02 15:15 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork
2019-05-02 15:50 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2019-05-02 20:16 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2019-05-03 15:14 ` [PATCH] " Petr Mladek
2019-05-06  7:11   ` Daniel Vetter
2019-05-06  7:48     ` Petr Mladek
2019-05-06  8:40       ` Daniel Vetter
2019-05-06  7:45 ` [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2 Daniel Vetter
2019-05-06  8:16   ` Petr Mladek
2019-05-06  8:26     ` Petr Mladek
2019-05-06  9:38       ` Daniel Vetter
2019-05-06 11:24         ` Petr Mladek
2019-05-08  8:17           ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2019-05-09 15:08             ` Petr Mladek
2019-05-06  8:20   ` Petr Mladek
2019-05-09 10:32   ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2019-05-09 13:05     ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-05-06  8:08 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for RFC: console: hack up console_trylock more (rev2) Patchwork
2019-05-06  8:30 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork

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=20190509130504.GW2623@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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