* [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}()
@ 2010-11-12 7:32 Greg Thelen
2010-11-12 12:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Greg Thelen @ 2010-11-12 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, Oleg Nesterov, Jens Axboe, Paul E. McKenney
Cc: Greg Thelen, Alexander Viro, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel,
linux-mm
Using:
- CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR=y
- CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
- CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y
- CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y
- CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y
found a missing rcu lock during boot on a 512 MiB x86_64 ubuntu vm:
===================================================
[ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------
kernel/pid.c:419 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
1 lock held by ureadahead/1355:
#0: (tasklist_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8115bc09>] sys_ioprio_set+0x7f/0x29e
stack backtrace:
Pid: 1355, comm: ureadahead Not tainted 2.6.37-dbg-DEV #1
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff8109c10c>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3
[<ffffffff81088cbf>] find_task_by_pid_ns+0x44/0x5d
[<ffffffff81088cfa>] find_task_by_vpid+0x22/0x24
[<ffffffff8115bc3e>] sys_ioprio_set+0xb4/0x29e
[<ffffffff8147cf21>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x3a/0x3c
[<ffffffff8105c409>] sysenter_dispatch+0x7/0x2c
[<ffffffff8147cee2>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
The fix is to:
a) grab rcu lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() and
b) avoid grabbing tasklist_lock.
Discussion in: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128951324702889
Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
---
fs/ioprio.c | 13 ++++---------
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ioprio.c b/fs/ioprio.c
index 748cfb9..7da2a06 100644
--- a/fs/ioprio.c
+++ b/fs/ioprio.c
@@ -103,12 +103,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(ioprio_set, int, which, int, who, int, ioprio)
}
ret = -ESRCH;
- /*
- * We want IOPRIO_WHO_PGRP/IOPRIO_WHO_USER to be "atomic",
- * so we can't use rcu_read_lock(). See re-copy of ->ioprio
- * in copy_process().
- */
- read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_lock();
switch (which) {
case IOPRIO_WHO_PROCESS:
if (!who)
@@ -153,7 +148,7 @@ free_uid:
ret = -EINVAL;
}
- read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
return ret;
}
@@ -197,7 +192,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(ioprio_get, int, which, int, who)
int ret = -ESRCH;
int tmpio;
- read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_lock();
switch (which) {
case IOPRIO_WHO_PROCESS:
if (!who)
@@ -250,6 +245,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(ioprio_get, int, which, int, who)
ret = -EINVAL;
}
- read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
return ret;
}
--
1.7.3.1
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}()
2010-11-12 7:32 [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() Greg Thelen
@ 2010-11-12 12:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-11-12 17:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-15 9:15 ` Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2010-11-12 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Thelen
Cc: Andrew Morton, Oleg Nesterov, Jens Axboe, Alexander Viro,
linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:32:47PM -0800, Greg Thelen wrote:
> Using:
> - CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR=y
> - CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
> - CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y
> - CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y
> - CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y
> found a missing rcu lock during boot on a 512 MiB x86_64 ubuntu vm:
> ===================================================
> [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
> ---------------------------------------------------
> kernel/pid.c:419 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
> 1 lock held by ureadahead/1355:
> #0: (tasklist_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8115bc09>] sys_ioprio_set+0x7f/0x29e
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 1355, comm: ureadahead Not tainted 2.6.37-dbg-DEV #1
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff8109c10c>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3
> [<ffffffff81088cbf>] find_task_by_pid_ns+0x44/0x5d
> [<ffffffff81088cfa>] find_task_by_vpid+0x22/0x24
> [<ffffffff8115bc3e>] sys_ioprio_set+0xb4/0x29e
> [<ffffffff8147cf21>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x3a/0x3c
> [<ffffffff8105c409>] sysenter_dispatch+0x7/0x2c
> [<ffffffff8147cee2>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
>
> The fix is to:
> a) grab rcu lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() and
> b) avoid grabbing tasklist_lock.
> Discussion in: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128951324702889
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
> ---
> fs/ioprio.c | 13 ++++---------
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ioprio.c b/fs/ioprio.c
> index 748cfb9..7da2a06 100644
> --- a/fs/ioprio.c
> +++ b/fs/ioprio.c
> @@ -103,12 +103,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(ioprio_set, int, which, int, who, int, ioprio)
> }
>
> ret = -ESRCH;
> - /*
> - * We want IOPRIO_WHO_PGRP/IOPRIO_WHO_USER to be "atomic",
> - * so we can't use rcu_read_lock(). See re-copy of ->ioprio
> - * in copy_process().
> - */
> - read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_lock();
> switch (which) {
> case IOPRIO_WHO_PROCESS:
> if (!who)
> @@ -153,7 +148,7 @@ free_uid:
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -197,7 +192,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(ioprio_get, int, which, int, who)
> int ret = -ESRCH;
> int tmpio;
>
> - read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_lock();
> switch (which) {
> case IOPRIO_WHO_PROCESS:
> if (!who)
> @@ -250,6 +245,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(ioprio_get, int, which, int, who)
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return ret;
> }
> --
> 1.7.3.1
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}()
2010-11-12 7:32 [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() Greg Thelen
2010-11-12 12:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
@ 2010-11-12 17:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-15 9:15 ` Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Oleg Nesterov @ 2010-11-12 17:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Thelen
Cc: Andrew Morton, Jens Axboe, Paul E. McKenney, Alexander Viro,
linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On 11/11, Greg Thelen wrote:
>
> The fix is to:
> a) grab rcu lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() and
> b) avoid grabbing tasklist_lock.
> Discussion in: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128951324702889
>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> ---
> fs/ioprio.c | 13 ++++---------
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ioprio.c b/fs/ioprio.c
> index 748cfb9..7da2a06 100644
> --- a/fs/ioprio.c
> +++ b/fs/ioprio.c
> @@ -103,12 +103,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(ioprio_set, int, which, int, who, int, ioprio)
> }
>
> ret = -ESRCH;
> - /*
> - * We want IOPRIO_WHO_PGRP/IOPRIO_WHO_USER to be "atomic",
> - * so we can't use rcu_read_lock(). See re-copy of ->ioprio
> - * in copy_process().
> - */
> - read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_lock();
> switch (which) {
> case IOPRIO_WHO_PROCESS:
> if (!who)
> @@ -153,7 +148,7 @@ free_uid:
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -197,7 +192,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(ioprio_get, int, which, int, who)
> int ret = -ESRCH;
> int tmpio;
>
> - read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_lock();
> switch (which) {
> case IOPRIO_WHO_PROCESS:
> if (!who)
> @@ -250,6 +245,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(ioprio_get, int, which, int, who)
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return ret;
> }
> --
> 1.7.3.1
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}()
2010-11-12 7:32 [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() Greg Thelen
2010-11-12 12:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-11-12 17:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
@ 2010-11-15 9:15 ` Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2010-11-15 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Thelen
Cc: Andrew Morton, Oleg Nesterov, Paul E. McKenney, Alexander Viro,
linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On 2010-11-12 08:32, Greg Thelen wrote:
> Using:
> - CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR=y
> - CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
> - CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y
> - CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y
> - CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y
> found a missing rcu lock during boot on a 512 MiB x86_64 ubuntu vm:
> ===================================================
> [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
> ---------------------------------------------------
> kernel/pid.c:419 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
> 1 lock held by ureadahead/1355:
> #0: (tasklist_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8115bc09>] sys_ioprio_set+0x7f/0x29e
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 1355, comm: ureadahead Not tainted 2.6.37-dbg-DEV #1
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff8109c10c>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3
> [<ffffffff81088cbf>] find_task_by_pid_ns+0x44/0x5d
> [<ffffffff81088cfa>] find_task_by_vpid+0x22/0x24
> [<ffffffff8115bc3e>] sys_ioprio_set+0xb4/0x29e
> [<ffffffff8147cf21>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x3a/0x3c
> [<ffffffff8105c409>] sysenter_dispatch+0x7/0x2c
> [<ffffffff8147cee2>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
>
> The fix is to:
> a) grab rcu lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() and
> b) avoid grabbing tasklist_lock.
> Discussion in: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128951324702889
Thanks Greg, applied.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-11-15 9:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-11-12 7:32 [PATCH] ioprio: grab rcu_read_lock in sys_ioprio_{set,get}() Greg Thelen
2010-11-12 12:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-11-12 17:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-15 9:15 ` Jens Axboe
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).