linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@infradead.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Anton Arapov <anton@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] uprobes: kill uprobes_srcu/uprobe_srcu_id
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 23:48:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1334526513.28150.23.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120415195351.GA22095@redhat.com>

On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 21:53 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2012-04-14 at 22:52 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > >     - can it work or I missed something "in general" ?
> > > >
> > > > So we insert in the rb-tree before we take mmap_sem, this means we can
> > > > hit a non-uprobe int3 and still find a uprobe there, no?
> > >
> > > Yes, but unless I miss something this is "off-topic", this
> > > can happen with or without these changes. If find_uprobe()
> > > succeeds we assume that this bp was inserted by uprobe.
> >
> > OK, but then I completely missed what the point of that
> > down_write() stuff is..
> 
> To ensure handle_swbp() can't race with unregister + register
> and send the wrong SIGTRAP.
> 
> handle_swbp() roughly does under down_read(mmap_sem)
> 
> 
> 	if (find_uprobe(vaddr))
> 		process_uprobe();
> 	else
> 	if (is_swbp_at_addr_fast(vaddr))	// non-uprobe int3
> 		send_sig(SIGTRAP);
> 	else
> 		restart_insn(vaddr);		// raced with unregister
> 
> 
> note that is_swbp_at_addr_fast() is used (currently) to detect
> the race with upbrobe_unregister() and that is why we can remove
> uprobes_srcu.
> 
> But if find_uprobe() fails, there is a window before
> is_swbp_at_addr_fast() reads the memory. Suppose that the next
> uprobe_register() inserts the new uprobe at the same address.
> In this case the task will be wrongly killed.

OK, still not seeing how your proposal could work.. consider the below
patch comment, I'm not seeing how is_swbp_at_addr_fast() deals with an
in-progress INT3 while we remove the probe.

By ensuring the non-race with reg/unreg it will either find the uprobe
(no problem) or not find it and not see a breakpoint instruction either,
even though the pending breakpoint was generated by a uprobe (which is
now gone), causing a false positive SIGTRAP.

Or am I still not getting it?

---
 kernel/events/uprobes.c |   53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
 1 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
index 29e881b..67818ff 100644
--- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
@@ -723,20 +723,57 @@ remove_breakpoint(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm, loff_t vaddr)
 }
 
 /*
- * There could be threads that have hit the breakpoint and are entering the
- * notifier code and trying to acquire the uprobes_treelock. The thread
- * calling delete_uprobe() that is removing the uprobe from the rb_tree can
- * race with these threads and might acquire the uprobes_treelock compared
- * to some of the breakpoint hit threads. In such a case, the breakpoint
- * hit threads will not find the uprobe. The current unregistering thread
- * waits till all other threads have hit a breakpoint, to acquire the
- * uprobes_treelock before the uprobe is removed from the rbtree.
+ * <userspace>
+ *  ...
+ *  int3 ---->	<IRQ>
+ *	   	  do_int3
+ *	  (A)	    DIE_INT3 -> uprobe_pre_sstep_notifier()
+ *	   	      ...
+ *		      set_thread_flag(TIF_UPROBE)
+ *		      srcu_read_lock_raw()
+ *		<EOI>
+ *	  (B)
+ *		ret_from_intr
+ *		  do_notify_resume()
+ *		    uprobe_notify_resume()
+ *		      handle_swbp()
+ *		        uprobe = find_uprobe()
+ *		          atomic_inc(&uprobe->ref)
+ *			srcu_read_unlock_raw()
+ *			...
+ *	  (C)
+ *	  		put_uprobe()
+ *	 <----	ret_from_intr
+ *
+ * ...
  */
 static void delete_uprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe)
 {
 	unsigned long flags;
 
+	/*
+	 * At this point all breakpoint instructions belonging to this uprobe
+	 * have been removed, so no new references to this uprobe can be
+	 * created, however!
+	 *
+	 * There could be an in-progress breakpoint from before we removed the
+	 * instruction still pending (A). synchronize_sched() insures all CPUs
+	 * will have scheduled at least once, therefore all such pending
+	 * interrupts will hereafter have reached (B) and thus have taken their
+	 * SRCU reference.
+	 */
+	synchronize_sched();
+
+	/*
+	 * Wait for all in-progress breakpoint handlers to finish, ensuring all
+	 * handlers passed (C) turning all references into active refcounts.
+	 */
 	synchronize_srcu(&uprobes_srcu);
+
+	/*
+	 * We can now safely remove the uprobe, all references are active
+	 * references and the refcounting will work as expected.
+	 */
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&uprobes_treelock, flags);
 	rb_erase(&uprobe->rb_node, &uprobes_tree);
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&uprobes_treelock, flags);

--
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 internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-15 21:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-05 22:20 [RFC 0/6] uprobes: kill uprobes_srcu/uprobe_srcu_id Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-05 22:20 ` [PATCH 1/6] uprobes: introduce find_active_uprobe() Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-05 22:21 ` [PATCH 2/6] uprobes: introduce is_swbp_at_addr_fast() Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-16 10:08   ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-16 14:44     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-16 14:55       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-16 15:34         ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-17 10:08           ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-17 17:09             ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-17 19:53               ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-05 22:21 ` [PATCH 3/6] uprobes: teach find_active_uprobe() to provide the "is_swbp" info Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-05 22:21 ` [PATCH 4/6] uprobes: change register_for_each_vma() to take mm->mmap_sem for writing Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-05 22:22 ` [PATCH 5/6] uprobes: teach handle_swbp() to rely on "is_swbp" rather than uprobes_srcu Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-05 22:22 ` [PATCH 6/6] uprobes: kill uprobes_srcu/uprobe_srcu_id Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-14 11:16 ` [RFC 0/6] " Ingo Molnar
2012-04-16 11:31   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-04-16 14:41     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 12:52       ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-04-25 14:22         ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-14 13:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-14 20:52   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-15 10:51     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-15 19:53       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-15 21:48         ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2012-04-15 23:44           ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-16 10:16             ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-16 21:47               ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-20 10:14                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-20 10:16                   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-04-20 18:58                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-20 18:37                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-23  7:14                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-23  7:24                       ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-04-23  7:40                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-23 17:29                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-23 19:18                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-23 20:50                               ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-23 21:25                                 ` Oleg Nesterov

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=1334526513.28150.23.camel@twins \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=acme@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=anton@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jkenisto@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).