linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brandon Philips <bphilips@suse.de>
To: Yinghai Lu <Yinghai.Lu@Sun.COM>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: x86: fix race in create_irq_nr on irq_desc
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 19:17:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100204031734.GA4930@jenkins.home.ifup.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B69CF1C.7050603@sun.com>

On 11:31 Wed 03 Feb 2010, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On 02/03/2010 09:42 AM, Brandon Philips wrote:
> > On 02:20 Wed 03 Feb 2010, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >> On 02/02/2010 07:31 PM, Brandon Philips wrote:
> >>> Race in create_irq_nr():
> >>>
> >>> - Thread 1 loops through and calls irq_to_desc_alloc_node with new=0x66.
> >>>
> >>> - Thread 2 has exited the loop with irq=0x66 and calls dynamic_irq_init(0x66)
> >>>   setting desc->chip_data = NULL
> >>>
> >>> - Thread 1 then dereferences NULL via desc_new->chip_data->vector
> >>
> >> two threads get same irq?
> > 
> > This race happened when two drivers were setting up MSI-X at the same
> > time via pci_enable_msix(). See this dmesg excerpt:
> > 
> > [   85.170610] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 97 for MSI/MSI-X
> > [   85.170611]   alloc irq_desc for 99 on node -1
> > [   85.170613] igb 0000:08:00.1: irq 98 for MSI/MSI-X
> > [   85.170614]   alloc kstat_irqs on node -1
> > [   85.170616] alloc irq_2_iommu on node -1
> > [   85.170617]   alloc irq_desc for 100 on node -1
> > [   85.170619]   alloc kstat_irqs on node -1
> > [   85.170621] alloc irq_2_iommu on node -1
> > [   85.170625] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 99 for MSI/MSI-X
> > [   85.170626]   alloc irq_desc for 101 on node -1
> > [   85.170628] igb 0000:08:00.1: irq 100 for MSI/MSI-X
> > [   85.170630]   alloc kstat_irqs on node -1
> > [   85.170631] alloc irq_2_iommu on node -1
> > [   85.170635]   alloc irq_desc for 102 on node -1
> > [   85.170636]   alloc kstat_irqs on node -1
> > [   85.170639] alloc irq_2_iommu on node -1
> > [   85.170646] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference
> > at 0000000000000088
> > 
> > As you can see igb and ixgbe are both alternating on create_irq_nr()
> > via pci_enable_msix() in their probe function. So, let me rewrite my
> > explanation using this example:
> > 
> > ixgbe: While looping through irq_desc_ptrs[] via create_irq_nr() ixgbe
> > choses irq_desc_ptrs[102] and exits the loop, drops vector_lock and
> > calls dynamic_irq_init. Then it sets irq_desc_ptrs[102]->chip_data =
> > NULL via dynamic_irq_init().
> > 
> > igb: Grabs the vector_lock now and starts looping over irq_desc_ptrs[]
> > via create_irq_nr(). It gets to irq_desc_ptrs[102] and does this:
> > 
> > 	cfg_new = irq_desc_ptrs[102]->chip_data;
> > 	if (cfg_new->vector != 0)
> > 		continue;
> > 
> > This hits the NULL deref.
> > 
> 
> please try following patch in addition to 
> 
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=37ef2a3029fde884808ff1b369677abc7dd9a79a

How is this commit related to this bug? The NULL deref I am hitting is
from this bit in create_irq_nr():

                 if (cfg_new->vector != 0)
                        continue;

Which comes before the assignment of cfg_new. I don't see how it is
related. Plus, node == -1 in this case so move_irq_desc() is a no-op.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
> index 7edafc7..14099ba 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
> @@ -3280,12 +3280,9 @@ unsigned int create_irq_nr(unsigned int irq_want, int node)
>  	}
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vector_lock, flags);
>  
> -	if (irq > 0) {
> -		dynamic_irq_init(irq);
> -		/* restore it, in case dynamic_irq_init clear it */
> -		if (desc_new)
> -			desc_new->chip_data = cfg_new;
> -	}
> +	if (irq > 0)
> +		dynamic_irq_init_keep_chip_data(irq);
> +
>  	return irq;
>  }

That would solve it too but I don't think it is a great
solution. Keeping the vector_lock until we are completely done setting
up the irq is more straightforward and won't cost much time at all.

I am hesitant to have it tested since it is a really small race
window, reproducing took 40+ reboots initially and looks technically
correct.

Thanks,

	Brandon


  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-04  3:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-03  3:31 x86: fix race in create_irq_nr on irq_desc Brandon Philips
2010-02-03 10:20 ` Yinghai Lu
2010-02-03 17:42   ` Brandon Philips
2010-02-03 19:31     ` Yinghai Lu
2010-02-04  3:17       ` Brandon Philips [this message]
2010-02-05  8:45     ` [PATCH] x86: keep chip_data in create_irq_nr Yinghai Lu
2010-02-05 21:05       ` Brandon Philips
2010-02-05 21:42         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-05 21:09       ` [PATCH] x86: keep chip_data in create_irq_nr and destroy_irq Brandon Philips
2010-02-05 22:44         ` Yinghai Lu
2010-02-05 22:55           ` Brandon Philips
2010-02-06  0:06             ` Yinghai Lu
2010-02-06  0:18               ` [PATCH v2] " Brandon Philips
2010-02-06  6:42                 ` [PATCH v3] " Brandon Philips
2010-02-06  7:16                   ` Yinghai Lu
2010-02-06 20:05                     ` Brandon Philips
2010-02-07 21:02                     ` [PATCH v4] " Brandon Philips
2010-02-19  6:06                       ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86, irq: Keep " tip-bot for Brandon Philips
2010-02-26 10:26                       ` [tip:x86/irq] x86: apic: Fix mismerge, add arch_probe_nr_irqs() again tip-bot for Ingo Molnar
2010-02-26 18:19                         ` Yinghai Lu
2010-02-27  9:10                           ` Ingo Molnar
2010-02-27  9:37                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-27  9:53                               ` Ingo Molnar
2010-02-27 10:12                                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-01 11:22                           ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-01 18:34                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-01 21:44                               ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-01 21:58                                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-02  8:31                                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-03-10 10:55                                   ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-10 10:55                                     ` [PATCH] x86: namespace some I/O APIC related structures and functions ijc
2010-03-10 17:07                                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-10 10:55                                     ` [PATCH] irq: move some interrupt arch_* functions into struct irq_chip ijc
2010-03-10 11:00                                       ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-10 17:18                                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-10 17:41                                           ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-10 18:11                                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-10 12:06                                       ` Yinghai Lu
2010-03-10 12:51                                         ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-10 17:42                                           ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-10 17:50                                             ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-10 18:15                                               ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-10 18:28                                                 ` Ian Campbell
2010-03-10 18:27                                             ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-03-10 18:59                                           ` Yinghai Lu
2010-03-10 19:15                                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-10 22:07                                       ` Michael Ellerman
2010-03-10 10:55                                     ` [PATCH] x86: irq_desc->chip_data is always correct whether or not SPARSE_IRQ is enabled ijc
2010-03-01 22:01                                 ` [tip:x86/irq] x86: apic: Fix mismerge, add arch_probe_nr_irqs() again Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-27 12:57                       ` [tip:x86/apic] " tip-bot for Ingo Molnar
2010-02-03 10:32 ` x86: fix race in create_irq_nr on irq_desc Yinghai Lu

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=20100204031734.GA4930@jenkins.home.ifup.org \
    --to=bphilips@suse.de \
    --cc=Yinghai.Lu@Sun.COM \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.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).