public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
	Shawn Landden <shawn@git.icu>,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: handle_exit_race && PF_EXITING
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 09:55:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191106085529.GA12575@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1911051959260.1869@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>

On 11/05, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>  sys_futex()
>     loop infinite because
>     	 PF_EXITING is set,
> 	 but PF_EXITPIDONE not

Yes.

IOW, the problem is very simple. RT task preempts the exiting lock owner
after it sets PF_EXITING but before it sets PF_EXITPIDONE, if they run on
the same CPU futex_lock_pi() will spin forever.

> So the obvious question is why PF_EXITPIDONE is set way after the futex
> exit cleanup has run,

Another obvious question is why this code checks PF_EXITING. I still think
it should not.

> The way we can deal with that is:
>
>     do_exit()
>     tsk->flags |= PF_EXITING;
>     ...
>     mutex_lock(&tsk->futex_exit_mutex);
>     futex_exit();
>     tsk->flags |= PF_EXITPIDONE;
>     mutex_unlock(&tsk->futex_exit_mutex);
>
> and on the futex lock_pi side:
>
>     if (!(tsk->flags & PF_EXITING))
>     	return 0;		<- All good
>
>     if (tsk->flags & PF_EXITPIDONE)
>         return -EOWNERDEAD;	<- Locker can take over
>
>     mutex_lock(&tsk->futex_exit_mutex);
>     if (tsk->flags & PF_EXITPIDONE) {
>         mutex_unlock(&tsk->futex_exit_mutex);
>         return -EOWNERDEAD;	<- Locker can take over
>     }
>
>     queue_futex();
>     mutex_unlock(&tsk->futex_exit_mutex);
>
> Not that I think it's pretty, but it plugs all holes AFAICT.

I have found the fix I sent in 2015, attached below. I forgot everything
I knew about futex.c, so I need some time to adapt it to the current code.

But I think it is clear what this patch tries to do, do you see any hole?

Oleg.

[PATCH] futex: don't spin waiting for PF_EXITING -> PF_EXITPIDONE transition

It is absolutely not clear why attach_to_pi_owner() returns -EAGAIN which
triggers "retry" if the lock owner is PF_EXITING but not PF_EXITPIDONE.
This burns CPU for no reason and this can even livelock if the rt_task()
caller preempts a PF_EXITING owner.

Remove the PF_EXITING check altogether. We do not care if it is exiting,
all we need to know is can we rely on exit_pi_state_list() or not. So we
also need to set PF_EXITPIDONE before we flush ->pi_state_list and call
exit_pi_state_list() unconditionally.

Perhaps we can add the fast-path list_empty() check in mm_release() back,
but lets fix the problem first. Besides, in theory this check is already
not correct, at least it should be list_empty_careful() to avoid the race
with free_pi_state() in progress.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/exit.c  |   22 +---------------------
 kernel/fork.c  |    3 +--
 kernel/futex.c |   40 ++++++++++------------------------------
 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/exit.c b/kernel/exit.c
index 6806c55..bc969ed 100644
--- a/kernel/exit.c
+++ b/kernel/exit.c
@@ -683,27 +683,13 @@ void do_exit(long code)
 	 */
 	if (unlikely(tsk->flags & PF_EXITING)) {
 		pr_alert("Fixing recursive fault but reboot is needed!\n");
-		/*
-		 * We can do this unlocked here. The futex code uses
-		 * this flag just to verify whether the pi state
-		 * cleanup has been done or not. In the worst case it
-		 * loops once more. We pretend that the cleanup was
-		 * done as there is no way to return. Either the
-		 * OWNER_DIED bit is set by now or we push the blocked
-		 * task into the wait for ever nirwana as well.
-		 */
+		/* Avoid the new additions to ->pi_state_list at least */
 		tsk->flags |= PF_EXITPIDONE;
 		set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
 		schedule();
 	}
 
 	exit_signals(tsk);  /* sets PF_EXITING */
-	/*
-	 * tsk->flags are checked in the futex code to protect against
-	 * an exiting task cleaning up the robust pi futexes.
-	 */
-	smp_mb();
-	raw_spin_unlock_wait(&tsk->pi_lock);
 
 	if (unlikely(in_atomic()))
 		pr_info("note: %s[%d] exited with preempt_count %d\n",
@@ -779,12 +765,6 @@ void do_exit(long code)
 	 * Make sure we are holding no locks:
 	 */
 	debug_check_no_locks_held();
-	/*
-	 * We can do this unlocked here. The futex code uses this flag
-	 * just to verify whether the pi state cleanup has been done
-	 * or not. In the worst case it loops once more.
-	 */
-	tsk->flags |= PF_EXITPIDONE;
 
 	if (tsk->io_context)
 		exit_io_context(tsk);
diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
index 4dc2dda..ec3208e 100644
--- a/kernel/fork.c
+++ b/kernel/fork.c
@@ -803,8 +803,7 @@ void mm_release(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
 		tsk->compat_robust_list = NULL;
 	}
 #endif
-	if (unlikely(!list_empty(&tsk->pi_state_list)))
-		exit_pi_state_list(tsk);
+	exit_pi_state_list(tsk);
 #endif
 
 	uprobe_free_utask(tsk);
diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
index b101381..c1104a8 100644
--- a/kernel/futex.c
+++ b/kernel/futex.c
@@ -716,11 +716,13 @@ void exit_pi_state_list(struct task_struct *curr)
 
 	if (!futex_cmpxchg_enabled)
 		return;
+
 	/*
-	 * We are a ZOMBIE and nobody can enqueue itself on
-	 * pi_state_list anymore, but we have to be careful
-	 * versus waiters unqueueing themselves:
+	 * attach_to_pi_owner() can no longer add the new entry. But
+	 * we have to be careful versus waiters unqueueing themselves.
 	 */
+	curr->flags |= PF_EXITPIDONE;
+
 	raw_spin_lock_irq(&curr->pi_lock);
 	while (!list_empty(head)) {
 
@@ -905,24 +907,12 @@ static int attach_to_pi_owner(u32 uval, union futex_key *key,
 		return -EPERM;
 	}
 
-	/*
-	 * We need to look at the task state flags to figure out,
-	 * whether the task is exiting. To protect against the do_exit
-	 * change of the task flags, we do this protected by
-	 * p->pi_lock:
-	 */
 	raw_spin_lock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
-	if (unlikely(p->flags & PF_EXITING)) {
-		/*
-		 * The task is on the way out. When PF_EXITPIDONE is
-		 * set, we know that the task has finished the
-		 * cleanup:
-		 */
-		int ret = (p->flags & PF_EXITPIDONE) ? -ESRCH : -EAGAIN;
-
+	if (unlikely(p->flags & PF_EXITPIDONE)) {
+		/* exit_pi_state_list() was already called */
 		raw_spin_unlock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
 		put_task_struct(p);
-		return ret;
+		return -ESRCH;
 	}
 
 	/*
@@ -1633,12 +1623,7 @@ retry_private:
 				goto retry;
 			goto out;
 		case -EAGAIN:
-			/*
-			 * Two reasons for this:
-			 * - Owner is exiting and we just wait for the
-			 *   exit to complete.
-			 * - The user space value changed.
-			 */
+			/* The user space value changed. */
 			free_pi_state(pi_state);
 			pi_state = NULL;
 			double_unlock_hb(hb1, hb2);
@@ -2295,12 +2280,7 @@ retry_private:
 		case -EFAULT:
 			goto uaddr_faulted;
 		case -EAGAIN:
-			/*
-			 * Two reasons for this:
-			 * - Task is exiting and we just wait for the
-			 *   exit to complete.
-			 * - The user space value changed.
-			 */
+			/* The user space value changed. */
 			queue_unlock(hb);
 			put_futex_key(&q.key);
 			cond_resched();
-- 
1.5.5.1




  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-06  8:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-04  0:29 [RFC v2 PATCH] futex: extend set_robust_list to allow 2 locking ABIs at the same time Shawn Landden
2019-11-04  0:51 ` Shawn Landden
2019-11-04 15:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05  0:10   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05  9:48 ` Florian Weimer
2019-11-05  9:59   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05 10:06     ` Florian Weimer
2019-11-05 11:56       ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05 14:10         ` Carlos O'Donell
2019-11-05 14:27           ` Florian Weimer
2019-11-05 14:53             ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05 14:27           ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05 14:33             ` Florian Weimer
2019-11-05 14:48               ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06 14:00             ` Zack Weinberg
2019-11-06 14:04               ` Florian Weimer
2019-11-05 15:27     ` handle_exit_race && PF_EXITING Oleg Nesterov
2019-11-05 17:28       ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05 17:59         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05 18:56           ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-05 19:19             ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06  8:55               ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2019-11-06  9:53                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06 10:35                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-11-06 11:07                     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06 12:11                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-11-06 13:38                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06 17:42                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07 15:51                           ` Oleg Nesterov

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=20191106085529.GA12575@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=deepa.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=keithp@keithp.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=shawn@git.icu \
    --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