From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Subbaraman Narayanamurthy <subbaram@codeaurora.org>,
daniel@numascale.com, yuyang.du@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: [PATCH]: kthread: Fix memory ordering in __kthread_parkme
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 11:28:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141107102855.GA29390@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1411071037440.3789@nanos>
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:39:48AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > 2) the usage of __set_current_state(TASK_PARKED) in __kthread_parkme()
> > is wrong AFAICT, one should always use set_current_state() for
> > setting !TASK_RUNNING state. The comment with set_current_state()
> > explains why.
> >
> > This would've allowed the test_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK) load to have
> > been satisfied before the store of TASK_PARKED.
>
> My bad. Can you send a proper patch addressing that issue please? That
> should be tagged stable as well I guess.
Sure thing, something like so then?
---
Subject: kthread: Fix memory ordering in __kthread_parkme
One should always use set_current_state() to set !TASK_RUNNING states.
set_current_state(TASK_*); cond = true;
/* mb */ /* wmb */
if (!cond) wake_up_state(, TASK_*);
schedule();
By not having the mb we allow for the cond load to be satisfied before
the state store, this can result in:
if (!cond)
cond = true;
wake_up_state(, TASK_*);
__set_current_state(TASK_*);
schedule();
Which would block 'forever', since the cond is still false and the
wakeup would not have seen the !TASK_RUNNING state.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
kernel/kthread.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/kthread.c b/kernel/kthread.c
index 10e489c448fe..9787244d43ec 100644
--- a/kernel/kthread.c
+++ b/kernel/kthread.c
@@ -156,12 +156,12 @@ void *probe_kthread_data(struct task_struct *task)
static void __kthread_parkme(struct kthread *self)
{
- __set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
+ set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
while (test_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &self->flags)) {
if (!test_and_set_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &self->flags))
complete(&self->parked);
schedule();
- __set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
+ set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
}
clear_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &self->flags);
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-07 10:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-06 15:01 hotplug thread issues Peter Zijlstra
2014-11-07 9:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-11-07 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-11-07 18:41 ` [PATCH]: kthread: Fix memory ordering in __kthread_parkme Oleg Nesterov
2014-11-07 21:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20141107102855.GA29390@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=daniel@numascale.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=subbaram@codeaurora.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yuyang.du@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