public inbox for linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@igalia.com>
Cc: arnd@arndb.de, evgreen@chromium.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@gpiccoli.net,
	ardb@kernel.org, davidgow@google.com, jwerner@chromium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] firmware: google: Test spinlock on panic path to avoid lockups
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 17:52:30 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YxDVPqVkdgQbAIvY@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220819155059.451674-1-gpiccoli@igalia.com>

On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:50:59PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> Currently the gsmi driver registers a panic notifier as well as
> reboot and die notifiers. The callbacks registered are called in
> atomic and very limited context - for instance, panic disables
> preemption and local IRQs, also all secondary CPUs (not executing
> the panic path) are shutdown.
> 
> With that said, taking a spinlock in this scenario is a dangerous
> invitation for lockup scenarios. So, fix that by checking if the
> spinlock is free to acquire in the panic notifier callback - if not,
> bail-out and avoid a potential hang.
> 
> Fixes: 74c5b31c6618 ("driver: Google EFI SMI")
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> Cc: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com>
> ---
> 
> 
> This is a re-submission of the patch - it was in a series [0], but
> Greg suggested me to resubmit individually in order it gets picked
> by the relevant maintainers, instead of asking them to merge
> individual patches from a series. Notice I've trimmed a bit the CC
> list, it was bigger due to the patch being in a series...
> 
> This is truly the V3 of the patch, below is the diff between versions:
> 
> V3:
> - added Evan's review tag - thanks!
> 
> V2:
> - do not use spin_trylock anymore, to avoid messing with
> non-panic paths; now we just check the spinlock state in
> the panic notifier before taking it. Thanks Evan for the review!
> 
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220719195325.402745-4-gpiccoli@igalia.com/
> 
> 
>  drivers/firmware/google/gsmi.c | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/google/gsmi.c b/drivers/firmware/google/gsmi.c
> index adaa492c3d2d..3ef5f3c0b4e4 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/google/gsmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/google/gsmi.c
> @@ -681,6 +681,14 @@ static struct notifier_block gsmi_die_notifier = {
>  static int gsmi_panic_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
>  			       unsigned long reason, void *arg)
>  {
> +	/*
> +	 * Perform the lock check before effectively trying
> +	 * to acquire it on gsmi_shutdown_reason() to avoid
> +	 * potential lockups in atomic context.
> +	 */
> +	if (spin_is_locked(&gsmi_dev.lock))
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +

What happens if the lock is grabbed right after testing for it?
Shouldn't you use lockdep_assert_held() instead as the documentation
says to?


>  	gsmi_shutdown_reason(GSMI_SHUTDOWN_PANIC);

You are grabbing the lock way in this call, again, you have a window
where the check above would not have worked :(

I don't think this is fixing anything properly, sorry.

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-01 15:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-19 15:50 [PATCH V3] firmware: google: Test spinlock on panic path to avoid lockups Guilherme G. Piccoli
2022-09-01 15:52 ` Greg KH [this message]
2022-09-01 15:59   ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2022-09-01 16:04     ` Greg KH
2022-09-01 16:24       ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2022-09-01 16:44         ` Greg KH
2022-09-01 17:46           ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2022-09-01 18:28             ` Greg KH
2022-09-01 18:46               ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2022-09-01 18:59                 ` Greg KH
2022-09-01 19:02                   ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2022-09-01 22:13                     ` Andrew Morton
2022-09-06 17:09                       ` Evan Green
2022-09-08  0:35                         ` Guilherme G. Piccoli

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=YxDVPqVkdgQbAIvY@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=davidgow@google.com \
    --cc=evgreen@chromium.org \
    --cc=gpiccoli@igalia.com \
    --cc=jwerner@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel@gpiccoli.net \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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