linux-serial.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
To: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
	linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 11/27] tty: Don't release tty locks for wait queue sanity check
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:34:23 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5447EA9F.1070401@hurleysoftware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141022162911.432c9bcc@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk>

On 10/22/2014 11:29 AM, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
>> However, without needing the global tty_mutex held, the tty locks for
>> the releasing tty can now be held through the sleep. The sanity check
>> is for abnormal conditions caused by kernel bugs, not for recoverable
>> errors caused by misbehaving userspace; dropping the tty locks only
>> allows the tty state to get more sideways.
> 
> An open with O_NDELAY on the closing port now appears to be able to jam
> for 2 minutes ? Peviously it would at least be released by a signal.
> 
> That seems like a regression (and given the timeout is long) a bug.

This patch should only affect _really abnormal_ situations.

The only way that a tty is spinning in this loop and not getting released
is if the tty count is going to zero but some other thread is still on one
of the wait queues, but that's only possible if either:
1. the other thread never removed itself from the wait queue because it
crashed while on the wait queue, or
2. if somehow a thread is sleeping on one of the wait queues without having
passed through vfs.

IOW, since the tty count is going zero, the release in progress must be
for the last file descriptor for this tty, so how can some other thread
be on one of the wait queues without an in-use descriptor.

Both are serious errors, and the failed sanity test shows that the tty state
is corrupted; an open should not succeed as long as this is true.

It'll take some experimentation to see if the first situation is identifiable
and remediable; I'll put it on my todo list.

> Given that some code handles multiple tty devices using select and
> nonblocking opens on physical ports this one bothers me a little. The old
> behaviour wasn't right either (and actually stops Linux running some
> modem manager type tools), but the new behaviour looks worse.
> 
> Probably though the right way to fix it is in the open path ?

Yes, the tty lock in tty_open() should be interruptible. I've built a matrix
of how open() races with the previous release behavior at different locking
points so that the existing outcome can be replicated (or more easily analyzed
to decide if that's the behavior we want and how/whether to change that
behavior). The sticking point right now is dealing with how ASYNC_HUP_NOTIFY
modifies the outcome of the open. This also entails significant code archaeology.

I'm also exploring making the tty count atomic so that a racing open
can prevent a concurrent release from going to final close, which will
help to minimize the time window that an open will fail with EIO.

But first, I need to push out some more patches that have been unit-tested
(and -- don't laugh -- explore why printk disables interrupts and prevents
cpu migration while calling the console drivers. Seems ok to me...)

Regards,
Peter Hurley

  reply	other threads:[~2014-10-22 17:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-16 20:24 [PATCH -next 00/27] tty locking changes Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:24 ` [PATCH -next 01/27] tty: Don't hold tty_lock for ldisc release Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 02/27] tty: Invert tty_lock/ldisc_sem lock order Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 03/27] tty: Remove TTY_HUPPING Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 04/27] tty: Clarify re-open behavior of master ptys Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 05/27] tty: Check tty->count instead of TTY_CLOSING in tty_reopen() Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 06/27] pty: Always return -EIO if slave BSD pty opened first Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 07/27] tty: Re-open /dev/tty without tty_mutex Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 08/27] tty: Drop tty_mutex before tty reopen Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 09/27] tty: Remove TTY_CLOSING Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 10/27] tty: Don't take tty_mutex for tty count changes Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 11/27] tty: Don't release tty locks for wait queue sanity check Peter Hurley
2014-10-22 15:29   ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-10-22 17:34     ` Peter Hurley [this message]
2014-10-23 11:30       ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 12/27] tty: Document check_tty_count() requires tty_lock held Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 13/27] tty: Simplify pty pair teardown logic Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 14/27] tty: Fold pty pair handling into tty_flush_works() Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 15/27] tty: Simplify tty_ldisc_release() interface Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 16/27] tty: Simplify tty_release_checks() interface Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 17/27] tty: Simplify tty_release() state checks Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 18/27] tty: Change tty lock order to master->slave Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 19/27] tty: Remove tty_unhangup() declaration Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 20/27] tty: Refactor __tty_hangup to enable lockdep annotation Peter Hurley
2014-10-27 22:13   ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 21/27] pty: Don't drop pty master tty lock to hangup slave Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 22/27] tty: Document hangup call tree Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 23/27] pty, n_tty: Simplify input processing on final close Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 24/27] tty: Prefix tty_ldisc_{lock,lock_nested,unlock} functions Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 25/27] tty: Fix hung task on pty hangup Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 26/27] tty: Fix timeout on pty set ldisc Peter Hurley
2014-10-16 20:25 ` [PATCH -next 27/27] tty: Flush ldisc buffer atomically with tty flip buffers Peter Hurley
2014-10-22 15:31 ` [PATCH -next 00/27] tty locking changes One Thousand Gnomes
2014-11-05 17:12 ` [PATCH -next v2 00/26] " Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 01/26] tty: Don't hold tty_lock for ldisc release Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 02/26] tty: Invert tty_lock/ldisc_sem lock order Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 03/26] tty: Remove TTY_HUPPING Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 04/26] tty: Clarify re-open behavior of master ptys Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 05/26] tty: Check tty->count instead of TTY_CLOSING in tty_reopen() Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 06/26] pty: Always return -EIO if slave BSD pty opened first Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 07/26] tty: Re-open /dev/tty without tty_mutex Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 08/26] tty: Drop tty_mutex before tty reopen Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 09/26] tty: Remove TTY_CLOSING Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 10/26] tty: Don't take tty_mutex for tty count changes Peter Hurley
2014-11-06  2:33     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-11-06  2:39       ` Peter Hurley
2014-11-06  2:50         ` Peter Hurley
2014-11-06  3:46           ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 11/26] tty: Don't release tty locks for wait queue sanity check Peter Hurley
2014-11-06  2:40     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 12/26] tty: Document check_tty_count() requires tty_lock held Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 13/26] tty: Simplify pty pair teardown logic Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 14/26] tty: Fold pty pair handling into tty_flush_works() Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 15/26] tty: Simplify tty_ldisc_release() interface Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:12   ` [PATCH -next v2 16/26] tty: Simplify tty_release_checks() interface Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 17/26] tty: Simplify tty_release() state checks Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 18/26] tty: Change tty lock order to master->slave Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 19/26] tty: Preset lock subclass for nested tty locks Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 20/26] tty: Remove tty_unhangup() declaration Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 21/26] pty: Don't drop pty master tty lock to hangup slave Peter Hurley
2014-11-11 15:49     ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 22/26] pty, n_tty: Simplify input processing on final close Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 23/26] tty: Prefix tty_ldisc_{lock,lock_nested,unlock} functions Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 24/26] tty: Fix hung task on pty hangup Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 25/26] tty: Fix timeout on pty set ldisc Peter Hurley
2014-11-05 17:13   ` [PATCH -next v2 26/26] tty: Flush ldisc buffer atomically with tty flip buffers Peter Hurley

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=5447EA9F.1070401@hurleysoftware.com \
    --to=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
    --cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).