public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Darren Hart <darren@dvhart.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>,
	Larry Woodman <lwoodman@redhat.com>,
	Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] futex: check PF_KTHREAD rather than !p->mm to filter out kthreads
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 19:10:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150205181014.GA20244@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150205162725.GK5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>

Let me first say that I simply do not know if PI+robust futex is actually
supposed (or guaranteed) to work.

Documentation/pi-futex.txt says

	'robustness' and 'PI' are two orthogonal
	properties of futexes, and all four combinations are possible: futex,
	robust-futex, PI-futex, robust+PI-futex.

And exit_robust_list() checks bit 0 to detect the "PI" case, so I think
this should work.

However, this comment

	/*
	 * This task is holding PI mutexes at exit time => bad.
	 * Kernel cleans up PI-state, but userspace is likely hosed.
	 * (Robust-futex cleanup is separate and might save the day for userspace.)
	 */

above exit_pi_state_list() looks confusing. In fact it looks wrong if
PI+robust should work. Because handle_futex_death() seems to rely on
exit_pi_state_list.

Now, if it should work,

On 02/05, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> So as long as we unhash _last_ I can't see this happening, we'll always
> find the task, the robust list walk doesn't care about PI state.

and it simply can't take care of PI state. ->pi_state can be NULL by
the time exit_robust_list() is called.

> But please, if you suspect, share a little more detail on how you see
> this happening, this is not code I've looked at in detail before.

Heh, I am reading it for the first time ;) So I can be easily wrong.

But afaics the race/problem is very simple. Suppose a task T locks a PI+robust
mutex and exits. I this case (I presume) sys_futex(uaddr, FUTEX_LOCK_PI)
from another task X must always succeed sooner or later. But

	- X takes queue_lock() and reads *uaddr == T->pid. Need to setup
	  pi_state and wait. FUTEX_WAITERS is set.

	- T exits and calls handle_futex_death(). This clears FUTEX_TID_MASK
	  and sets FUTEX_OWNER_DIED, without any lock.

	  T->pi_state_list is empty, exit_pi_state_list() does nothing.

	  T goes away or simply sets PF_EXITPIDONE (lets ignore PF_EXITING).

	- X calls attach_to_pi_owner() and futex_find_get_task() returns NULL,
	  or we detect PF_EXITPIDONE, this doesn't really matter.

	  What does matter (unless I missed something) is that -ESRCH is wrong
	  in this case. This mutex was unlocked. It is robust, so we should not
	  miss this unlock.

So I think that in this case we either need to recheck that *uaddr is still the
same (and turn -ESRCH into -EAGAIN otherwise), or change handle_futex_death() to
serialize with X so that it can proceed and attach pi_state.

No?

Oleg.


  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-05 18:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-02 14:05 [PATCH 0/1] futex: check PF_KTHREAD rather than !p->mm to filter out kthreads Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-02 14:05 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-04 10:48   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-14 18:01   ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-14 20:57     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-14 21:15       ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-14 21:54         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-18 17:11   ` [tip:locking/core] locking/futex: Check " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-02 15:11 ` [PATCH 0/1] futex: check " Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-02 15:13   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-02 15:14     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-02 16:20   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-03 20:09   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-04 11:12     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-04 20:25       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-05 16:27         ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-05 18:10           ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2015-02-06 10:46             ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-06 17:04               ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-09 20:38                 ` Darren Hart
2015-02-10 11:14                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-16 20:13 ` [PATCH 0/1] futex: don't spin waiting for PF_EXITING -> PF_EXITPIDONE transition Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-16 20:13   ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-27  9:52     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-27 11:54       ` 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=20150205181014.GA20244@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=darren@dvhart.com \
    --cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lwoodman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mguzik@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --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