From: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Ben Woodard <bwoodard@llnl.gov>, Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>,
Stable Team <stable@kernel.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: [Patch] rwsem: fix rwsem_is_locked() bug
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:19:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090930032138.3919.72085.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
rwsem_is_locked() tests ->activity without locks, so we should always
keep ->activity consistent. However, the code in __rwsem_do_wake()
breaks this rule, it updates ->activity after _all_ readers waken up,
this may give some reader a wrong ->activity value, thus cause
rwsem_is_locked() behaves wrong.
Brian has a kernel module to reproduce this, I can include it
if any of you need. Of course, with Brian's approval.
With this patch applied, I can't trigger that bug any more.
Reported-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Cc: Ben Woodard <bwoodard@llnl.gov>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <amwang@redhat.com>
Cc: Stable Team <stable@kernel.org>
---
diff --git a/lib/rwsem-spinlock.c b/lib/rwsem-spinlock.c
index 9df3ca5..44e4484 100644
--- a/lib/rwsem-spinlock.c
+++ b/lib/rwsem-spinlock.c
@@ -49,7 +49,6 @@ __rwsem_do_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int wakewrite)
{
struct rwsem_waiter *waiter;
struct task_struct *tsk;
- int woken;
waiter = list_entry(sem->wait_list.next, struct rwsem_waiter, list);
@@ -78,24 +77,21 @@ __rwsem_do_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int wakewrite)
/* grant an infinite number of read locks to the front of the queue */
dont_wake_writers:
- woken = 0;
while (waiter->flags & RWSEM_WAITING_FOR_READ) {
struct list_head *next = waiter->list.next;
+ sem->activity++;
list_del(&waiter->list);
tsk = waiter->task;
smp_mb();
waiter->task = NULL;
wake_up_process(tsk);
put_task_struct(tsk);
- woken++;
if (list_empty(&sem->wait_list))
break;
waiter = list_entry(next, struct rwsem_waiter, list);
}
- sem->activity += woken;
-
out:
return sem;
}
next reply other threads:[~2009-09-30 3:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-30 3:19 Amerigo Wang [this message]
2009-09-30 23:08 ` [Patch] rwsem: fix rwsem_is_locked() bug Andrew Morton
2009-10-05 3:23 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-10-01 12:34 ` David Howells
2009-10-05 3:26 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-10-05 6:30 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-10-05 12:58 ` David Howells
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=20090930032138.3919.72085.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain \
--to=amwang@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=behlendorf1@llnl.gov \
--cc=bwoodard@llnl.gov \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@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