From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
Cc: Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6.37-rc1] sys_ioprio_set and RCU locking...
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 05:52:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101108135204.GE2580@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CD7FAFD.1060802@fusionio.com>
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 02:28:29PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2010-11-07 19:54, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 12:15:30PM +0000, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> >> With 2.6.37-rc1, I observe sys_ioprio_set not taking the RCU lock [1]
> >> across access to the task credentials.
> >>
> >> Inspecting the code in fs/ioprio.c, the tasklist_lock is held for read
> >> across the __task_cred call, which is presumably sufficient to prevent
> >> the task credentials becoming stale.
> >>
> >> Thus, is there preference to take the RCU lock for read across the
> >> credential access eg at [2], or annotate the call?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >> --- [1]
> >>
> >> ===================================================
> >>
> >> [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> kernel/pid.c:419 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> other info that might help us debug this:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
> >>
> >> 1 lock held by start-stop-daem/2246:
> >>
> >> #0: (tasklist_lock){.?.?..}, at: [<ffffffff811a2dfa>]
> >> sys_ioprio_set+0x8a/0x400
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> stack backtrace:
> >>
> >> Pid: 2246, comm: start-stop-daem Not tainted 2.6.37-rc1-330cd+ #2
> >>
> >> Call Trace:
> >>
> >> [<ffffffff8109f5f4>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xa4/0xc0
> >>
> >> [<ffffffff81085651>] find_task_by_pid_ns+0x81/0x90
> >>
> >> [<ffffffff8108567d>] find_task_by_vpid+0x1d/0x20
> >>
> >> [<ffffffff811a3160>] sys_ioprio_set+0x3f0/0x400
> >>
> >> [<ffffffff816efa79>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
> >>
> >> [<ffffffff81003482>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> >>
> >>
> >> --- [2]
> >>
> >> Take the RCU lock for read across acquiring the pointer to the task
> >> credentials and dereferencing it.
> >
> > Jens, does this look sane?
>
> Yes, looks clean enough to me.
Very good! Are you willing to take the patch in your tree?
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-08 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-02 12:15 [2.6.37-rc1] sys_ioprio_set and RCU locking Daniel J Blueman
2010-11-07 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-11-08 13:28 ` Jens Axboe
2010-11-08 13:52 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-11-08 13:55 ` Jens Axboe
2010-11-09 20:35 ` Jens Axboe
2010-11-09 21:49 ` Daniel J Blueman
2010-11-09 21:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20101108135204.GE2580@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=daniel.blueman@gmail.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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