From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
Cc: dave@stgolabs.net, josh@joshtriplett.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] kernel: rcu: a possible sleep-in-atomic-context bug in srcu_read_delay()
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2018 21:18:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180813041826.GL24813@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4179b4d2-b832-abcd-d407-b865765f28d6@gmail.com>
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:04:10AM +0800, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
> The kernel may sleep with holding a spinlock.
>
> The function call paths (from bottom to top) in Linux-4.16 are:
>
> [FUNC] schedule_timeout_interruptible
> kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c, 523: schedule_timeout_interruptible in
> srcu_read_delay
> kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c, 1105: [FUNC_PTR]srcu_read_delay in
> rcu_torture_timer
> kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c, 1104: spin_lock in rcu_torture_timer
>
> Note that [FUNC_PTR] means a function pointer call is used.
>
> I do not find a good way to fix, so I only report.
> This is found by my static analysis tool (DSAC).
Interesting. I would have expected to have gotten a "scheduling while
atomic" error message, which I do not recall seeing. And I ran a great
deal of rcutorture on v4.16.
So let's see... As you say, the rcu_torture_timer() function does in
fact acquire rand_lock in 4.16 and 4.17, in which case sleeping would
indeed be illegal. But let's take a look at srcu_read_delay():
static void
srcu_read_delay(struct torture_random_state *rrsp, struct rt_read_seg *rtrsp)
{
long delay;
const long uspertick = 1000000 / HZ;
const long longdelay = 10;
/* We want there to be long-running readers, but not all the time. */
delay = torture_random(rrsp) %
(nrealreaders * 2 * longdelay * uspertick);
if (!delay && in_task()) {
schedule_timeout_interruptible(longdelay);
rtrsp->rt_delay_jiffies = longdelay;
} else {
rcu_read_delay(rrsp, rtrsp);
}
}
The call to schedule_timeout_interruptible() cannot happen unless the
in_task() macro returns true, which it won't if the SOFTIRQ_OFFSET bit
is set:
#define in_task() (!(preempt_count() & \
(NMI_MASK | HARDIRQ_MASK | SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)))
And the SOFTIRQ_OFFSET bit will be set if srcu_read_delay()
is invoked from a timer handler, which is the case for the
call from rcu_torture_timer(). So if that lock is held,
schedule_timeout_interruptible() won't ever be invoked.
So what am I missing here?
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-13 4:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-13 3:04 [BUG] kernel: rcu: a possible sleep-in-atomic-context bug in srcu_read_delay() Jia-Ju Bai
2018-08-13 4:18 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-08-13 9:26 ` Jia-Ju Bai
2018-08-13 12:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-08-15 1:05 ` Jia-Ju Bai
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=20180813041826.GL24813@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=baijiaju1990@gmail.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).