From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] powerpc/watchdog: Tighten non-atomic read-modify-write access
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2021 17:17:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9ec54cd9-37fc-3f09-212b-42fee6664a2e@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211104161057.1255659-3-npiggin@gmail.com>
Le 04/11/2021 à 17:10, Nicholas Piggin a écrit :
> Most updates to wd_smp_cpus_pending are under lock except the watchdog
> interrupt bit clear.
>
> This can race with non-atomic RMW updates to the mask under lock, which
> can happen in two instances:
>
> Firstly, if another CPU detects this one is stuck, removes it from the
> mask, mask becomes empty and is re-filled with non-atomic stores. This
> is okay because it would re-fill the mask with this CPU's bit clear
> anyway (because this CPU is now stuck), so it doesn't matter that the
> bit clear update got "lost". Add a comment for this.
>
> Secondly, if another CPU detects a different CPU is stuck and removes it
> from the pending mask with a non-atomic store to bytes which also
> include the bit of this CPU. This case can result in the bit clear being
> lost and the end result being the bit is set. This should be so rare it
> hardly matters, but to make things simpler to reason about just avoid
> the non-atomic access for that case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c
> index be80071336a4..1d2623230297 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -131,10 +131,10 @@ static void wd_lockup_ipi(struct pt_regs *regs)
> /* Do not panic from here because that can recurse into NMI IPI layer */
> }
>
> -static void set_cpumask_stuck(const struct cpumask *cpumask, u64 tb)
> +static bool set_cpu_stuck(int cpu, u64 tb)
> {
> - cpumask_or(&wd_smp_cpus_stuck, &wd_smp_cpus_stuck, cpumask);
> - cpumask_andnot(&wd_smp_cpus_pending, &wd_smp_cpus_pending, cpumask);
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &wd_smp_cpus_stuck);
> + cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &wd_smp_cpus_pending);
> /*
> * See wd_smp_clear_cpu_pending()
> */
> @@ -144,11 +144,9 @@ static void set_cpumask_stuck(const struct cpumask *cpumask, u64 tb)
> cpumask_andnot(&wd_smp_cpus_pending,
> &wd_cpus_enabled,
> &wd_smp_cpus_stuck);
> + return true;
> }
> -}
> -static void set_cpu_stuck(int cpu, u64 tb)
> -{
> - set_cpumask_stuck(cpumask_of(cpu), tb);
> + return false;
> }
>
> static void watchdog_smp_panic(int cpu, u64 tb)
> @@ -177,15 +175,17 @@ static void watchdog_smp_panic(int cpu, u64 tb)
> * get a backtrace on all of them anyway.
> */
> for_each_cpu(c, &wd_smp_cpus_pending) {
> + bool empty;
> if (c == cpu)
> continue;
> + /* Take the stuck CPUs out of the watch group */
> + empty = set_cpu_stuck(c, tb);
> smp_send_nmi_ipi(c, wd_lockup_ipi, 1000000);
> + if (empty)
> + break;
> }
> }
>
> - /* Take the stuck CPUs out of the watch group */
> - set_cpumask_stuck(&wd_smp_cpus_pending, tb);
> -
> wd_smp_unlock(&flags);
>
> if (sysctl_hardlockup_all_cpu_backtrace)
> @@ -232,6 +232,22 @@ static void wd_smp_clear_cpu_pending(int cpu, u64 tb)
> return;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * All other updates to wd_smp_cpus_pending are performed under
> + * wd_smp_lock. All of them are atomic except the case where the
> + * mask becomes empty and is reset. This will not happen here because
> + * cpu was tested to be in the bitmap (above), and a CPU only clears
> + * its own bit. _Except_ in the case where another CPU has detected a
> + * hard lockup on our CPU and takes us out of the pending mask. So in
> + * normal operation there will be no race here, no problem.
> + *
> + * In the lockup case, this atomic clear-bit vs a store that refills
> + * other bits in the accessed word wll not be a problem. The bit clear
> + * is atomic so it will not cause the store to get lost, and the store
> + * will never set this bit so it will not overwrite the bit clear. The
> + * only way for a stuck CPU to return to the pending bitmap is to
> + * become unstuck itself.
> + */
> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &wd_smp_cpus_pending);
>
> /*
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-05 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-04 16:10 [PATCH v2 0/5] powerpc: watchdog fixes Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-04 16:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] powerpc/watchdog: Fix missed watchdog reset due to memory ordering race Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-05 9:20 ` Laurent Dufour
2021-11-05 11:46 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-05 12:15 ` Laurent Dufour
2021-11-04 16:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] powerpc/watchdog: Tighten non-atomic read-modify-write access Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-05 16:17 ` Laurent Dufour [this message]
2021-11-04 16:10 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] powerpc/watchdog: Avoid holding wd_smp_lock over printk and smp_send_nmi_ipi Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-04 16:10 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] powerpc/watchdog: Read TB close to where it is used Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-05 13:39 ` Laurent Dufour
2021-11-04 16:10 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] powerpc/watchdog: Remove backtrace print from unstuck message Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-04 16:48 ` Laurent Dufour
2021-11-05 1:28 ` Nicholas Piggin
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=9ec54cd9-37fc-3f09-212b-42fee6664a2e@linux.ibm.com \
--to=ldufour@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).