From: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>
To: <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>,
Christian Ruppert <christian.ruppert@abilis.com>,
Pierrick Hascoet <pierrick.hascoet@abilis.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] timer: Fix possible issues with non serialized timer_pending( )
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:03:38 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1364553218-31255-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> (raw)
When stress testing ARC Linux from 3.9-rc3, we've hit a serialization
issue when mod_timer() races with itself. This is on a FPGA board and
kernel .config among others has !SMP and !PREEMPT_COUNT.
The issue happens in mod_timer( ) because timer_pending( ) based early
exit check is NOT done inside the timer base spinlock - as a networking
optimization.
The value used in there, timer->entry.next is also used further in call
chain (all inlines though) for actual list manipulation. However if the
register containing this pointer remains live across the spinlock (in a
UP setup with !PREEMPT_COUNT there's nothing forcing gcc to reload) then
a stale value of next pointer causes incorrect list manipulation,
observed with following sequence in our tests.
(0). tv1[x] <----> t1 <---> t2
(1). mod_timer(t1) interrupted after it calls timer_pending()
(2). mod_timer(t2) completes
(3). mod_timer(t1) resumes but messes up the list.
(4). __runt_timers( ) uses bogus timer_list entry / crashes in
timer->function
The simplest fix is to NOT rely on spinlock based compiler barrier but
add an explicit one in timer_pending()
FWIW, the relevant ARCompact disassembly of mod_timer which clearly
shows the issue due to register reuse is:
mod_timer:
push_s blink
mov_s r13,r0 # timer, timer
...
###### timer_pending( )
ld_s r3,[r13] # <------ <variable>.entry.next LOADED
brne r3, 0, @.L163
.L163:
....
###### spin_lock_irq( )
lr r5, [status32] # flags
bic r4, r5, 6 # temp, flags,
and.f 0, r5, 6 # flags,
flag.nz r4
###### detach_if_pending( ) begins
tst_s r3,r3 <--------------
# timer_pending( ) checks timer->entry.next
# r3 is NOT reloaded by gcc, using stale value
beq.d @.L169
mov.eq r0,0
# detach_timer( ): __list_del( )
ld r4,[r13,4] # <variable>.entry.prev, D.31439
st r4,[r3,4] # <variable>.prev, D.31439
st r3,[r4] # <variable>.next, D.30246
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>
Reported-by: Christian Ruppert <christian.ruppert@abilis.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Christian Ruppert <christian.ruppert@abilis.com>
Cc: Pierrick Hascoet <pierrick.hascoet@abilis.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
---
include/linux/timer.h | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/timer.h b/include/linux/timer.h
index 8c5a197..1537104 100644
--- a/include/linux/timer.h
+++ b/include/linux/timer.h
@@ -168,7 +168,16 @@ static inline void init_timer_on_stack_key(struct timer_list *timer,
*/
static inline int timer_pending(const struct timer_list * timer)
{
- return timer->entry.next != NULL;
+ int pending = timer->entry.next != NULL;
+
+ /*
+ * The check above enables timer fast path - early exit.
+ * However most of the call sites are not protected by timer->base
+ * spinlock. If the caller (say mod_timer) races with itself, it
+ * can use the stale "next" pointer. See commit log for details.
+ */
+ barrier();
+ return pending;
}
extern void add_timer_on(struct timer_list *timer, int cpu);
--
1.7.10.4
next reply other threads:[~2013-03-29 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-29 10:33 Vineet Gupta [this message]
2013-04-03 7:20 ` [PATCH] timer: Fix possible issues with non serialized timer_pending( ) Vineet Gupta
2013-04-03 8:53 ` Christian Ruppert
2013-04-03 12:36 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-04-03 13:03 ` Christian Ruppert
2013-04-03 13:10 ` [RFC] Add implicit barriers to irqsave/restore class of functions Christian Ruppert
2013-04-03 13:29 ` Vineet Gupta
2013-04-04 8:26 ` Christian Ruppert
2013-04-04 16:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-05 4:27 ` Vineet Gupta
2013-04-03 14:11 ` [PATCH] [PATCH] Gaurantee spinlocks implicit barrier for !PREEMPT_COUNT Vineet Gupta
2013-04-04 15:28 ` Christian Ruppert
2013-04-05 4:36 ` Vineet Gupta
2013-04-06 13:34 ` Vineet Gupta
2013-04-06 16:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-06 18:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-06 19:54 ` Jacquiot, Aurelien
2013-04-09 16:33 ` [PATCH] tile: comment assumption about __insn_mtspr for <asm/irqflags.h> Chris Metcalf
2013-04-08 4:20 ` [PATCH] [PATCH] Gaurantee spinlocks implicit barrier for !PREEMPT_COUNT Vineet Gupta
2013-04-08 4:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-08 13:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-08 14:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-04-08 14:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-08 14:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-04-08 15:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-09 14:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-10 7:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-08 14:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-04-08 4:49 ` Linus Torvalds
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=1364553218-31255-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com \
--to=vineet.gupta1@synopsys.com \
--cc=christian.ruppert@abilis.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pierrick.hascoet@abilis.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).