1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
|
From faad74e290468f037de33422cb1799c05477242d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:04:15 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 160/323] locking/rtmutex: Handle the various new futex race
conditions
Origin: https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/5.10/older/patches-5.10.204-rt100.tar.xz
RT opens a few new interesting race conditions in the rtmutex/futex
combo due to futex hash bucket lock being a 'sleeping' spinlock and
therefor not disabling preemption.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
kernel/futex/core.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 36 ++++++++++++---
kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h | 2 +
3 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/futex/core.c b/kernel/futex/core.c
index cde0ca876b93..706cd446ec71 100644
--- a/kernel/futex/core.c
+++ b/kernel/futex/core.c
@@ -2165,6 +2165,16 @@ static int futex_requeue(u32 __user *uaddr1, unsigned int flags,
*/
requeue_pi_wake_futex(this, &key2, hb2);
continue;
+ } else if (ret == -EAGAIN) {
+ /*
+ * Waiter was woken by timeout or
+ * signal and has set pi_blocked_on to
+ * PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS before we
+ * tried to enqueue it on the rtmutex.
+ */
+ this->pi_state = NULL;
+ put_pi_state(pi_state);
+ continue;
} else if (ret) {
/*
* rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() detected a
@@ -3182,7 +3192,7 @@ static int futex_wait_requeue_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags,
{
struct hrtimer_sleeper timeout, *to;
struct rt_mutex_waiter rt_waiter;
- struct futex_hash_bucket *hb;
+ struct futex_hash_bucket *hb, *hb2;
union futex_key key2 = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
struct futex_q q = futex_q_init;
int res, ret;
@@ -3234,20 +3244,55 @@ static int futex_wait_requeue_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags,
/* Queue the futex_q, drop the hb lock, wait for wakeup. */
futex_wait_queue_me(hb, &q, to);
- spin_lock(&hb->lock);
- ret = handle_early_requeue_pi_wakeup(hb, &q, &key2, to);
- spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
- if (ret)
- goto out;
+ /*
+ * On RT we must avoid races with requeue and trying to block
+ * on two mutexes (hb->lock and uaddr2's rtmutex) by
+ * serializing access to pi_blocked_on with pi_lock.
+ */
+ raw_spin_lock_irq(¤t->pi_lock);
+ if (current->pi_blocked_on) {
+ /*
+ * We have been requeued or are in the process of
+ * being requeued.
+ */
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(¤t->pi_lock);
+ } else {
+ /*
+ * Setting pi_blocked_on to PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS
+ * prevents a concurrent requeue from moving us to the
+ * uaddr2 rtmutex. After that we can safely acquire
+ * (and possibly block on) hb->lock.
+ */
+ current->pi_blocked_on = PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS;
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(¤t->pi_lock);
+
+ spin_lock(&hb->lock);
+
+ /*
+ * Clean up pi_blocked_on. We might leak it otherwise
+ * when we succeeded with the hb->lock in the fast
+ * path.
+ */
+ raw_spin_lock_irq(¤t->pi_lock);
+ current->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(¤t->pi_lock);
+
+ ret = handle_early_requeue_pi_wakeup(hb, &q, &key2, to);
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
+ if (ret)
+ goto out;
+ }
/*
- * In order for us to be here, we know our q.key == key2, and since
- * we took the hb->lock above, we also know that futex_requeue() has
- * completed and we no longer have to concern ourselves with a wakeup
- * race with the atomic proxy lock acquisition by the requeue code. The
- * futex_requeue dropped our key1 reference and incremented our key2
- * reference count.
+ * In order to be here, we have either been requeued, are in
+ * the process of being requeued, or requeue successfully
+ * acquired uaddr2 on our behalf. If pi_blocked_on was
+ * non-null above, we may be racing with a requeue. Do not
+ * rely on q->lock_ptr to be hb2->lock until after blocking on
+ * hb->lock or hb2->lock. The futex_requeue dropped our key1
+ * reference and incremented our key2 reference count.
*/
+ hb2 = hash_futex(&key2);
/* Check if the requeue code acquired the second futex for us. */
if (!q.rt_waiter) {
@@ -3256,14 +3301,15 @@ static int futex_wait_requeue_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags,
* did a lock-steal - fix up the PI-state in that case.
*/
if (q.pi_state && (q.pi_state->owner != current)) {
- spin_lock(q.lock_ptr);
+ spin_lock(&hb2->lock);
+ BUG_ON(&hb2->lock != q.lock_ptr);
ret = fixup_pi_state_owner(uaddr2, &q, current);
/*
* Drop the reference to the pi state which
* the requeue_pi() code acquired for us.
*/
put_pi_state(q.pi_state);
- spin_unlock(q.lock_ptr);
+ spin_unlock(&hb2->lock);
/*
* Adjust the return value. It's either -EFAULT or
* success (1) but the caller expects 0 for success.
@@ -3282,7 +3328,8 @@ static int futex_wait_requeue_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags,
pi_mutex = &q.pi_state->pi_mutex;
ret = rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock(pi_mutex, to, &rt_waiter);
- spin_lock(q.lock_ptr);
+ spin_lock(&hb2->lock);
+ BUG_ON(&hb2->lock != q.lock_ptr);
if (ret && !rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock(pi_mutex, &rt_waiter))
ret = 0;
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index b5d5c570a8ac..2ef5a6eb95da 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -136,6 +136,11 @@ static void fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(struct rt_mutex *lock)
WRITE_ONCE(*p, owner & ~RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS);
}
+static int rt_mutex_real_waiter(struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
+{
+ return waiter && waiter != PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS;
+}
+
/*
* We can speed up the acquire/release, if there's no debugging state to be
* set up.
@@ -378,7 +383,8 @@ int max_lock_depth = 1024;
static inline struct rt_mutex *task_blocked_on_lock(struct task_struct *p)
{
- return p->pi_blocked_on ? p->pi_blocked_on->lock : NULL;
+ return rt_mutex_real_waiter(p->pi_blocked_on) ?
+ p->pi_blocked_on->lock : NULL;
}
/*
@@ -514,7 +520,7 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(struct task_struct *task,
* reached or the state of the chain has changed while we
* dropped the locks.
*/
- if (!waiter)
+ if (!rt_mutex_real_waiter(waiter))
goto out_unlock_pi;
/*
@@ -947,6 +953,22 @@ static int task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex *lock,
return -EDEADLK;
raw_spin_lock(&task->pi_lock);
+ /*
+ * In the case of futex requeue PI, this will be a proxy
+ * lock. The task will wake unaware that it is enqueueed on
+ * this lock. Avoid blocking on two locks and corrupting
+ * pi_blocked_on via the PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS
+ * flag. futex_wait_requeue_pi() sets this when it wakes up
+ * before requeue (due to a signal or timeout). Do not enqueue
+ * the task if PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS is set.
+ */
+ if (task != current && task->pi_blocked_on == PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS) {
+ raw_spin_unlock(&task->pi_lock);
+ return -EAGAIN;
+ }
+
+ BUG_ON(rt_mutex_real_waiter(task->pi_blocked_on));
+
waiter->task = task;
waiter->lock = lock;
waiter->prio = task->prio;
@@ -970,7 +992,7 @@ static int task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex *lock,
rt_mutex_enqueue_pi(owner, waiter);
rt_mutex_adjust_prio(owner);
- if (owner->pi_blocked_on)
+ if (rt_mutex_real_waiter(owner->pi_blocked_on))
chain_walk = 1;
} else if (rt_mutex_cond_detect_deadlock(waiter, chwalk)) {
chain_walk = 1;
@@ -1066,7 +1088,7 @@ static void remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex *lock,
{
bool is_top_waiter = (waiter == rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock));
struct task_struct *owner = rt_mutex_owner(lock);
- struct rt_mutex *next_lock;
+ struct rt_mutex *next_lock = NULL;
lockdep_assert_held(&lock->wait_lock);
@@ -1092,7 +1114,8 @@ static void remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex *lock,
rt_mutex_adjust_prio(owner);
/* Store the lock on which owner is blocked or NULL */
- next_lock = task_blocked_on_lock(owner);
+ if (rt_mutex_real_waiter(owner->pi_blocked_on))
+ next_lock = task_blocked_on_lock(owner);
raw_spin_unlock(&owner->pi_lock);
@@ -1128,7 +1151,8 @@ void rt_mutex_adjust_pi(struct task_struct *task)
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&task->pi_lock, flags);
waiter = task->pi_blocked_on;
- if (!waiter || rt_mutex_waiter_equal(waiter, task_to_waiter(task))) {
+ if (!rt_mutex_real_waiter(waiter) ||
+ rt_mutex_waiter_equal(waiter, task_to_waiter(task))) {
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task->pi_lock, flags);
return;
}
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
index b1455dc2366f..096b16cfb096 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
@@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ enum rtmutex_chainwalk {
/*
* PI-futex support (proxy locking functions, etc.):
*/
+#define PI_WAKEUP_INPROGRESS ((struct rt_mutex_waiter *) 1)
+
extern struct task_struct *rt_mutex_next_owner(struct rt_mutex *lock);
extern void rt_mutex_init_proxy_locked(struct rt_mutex *lock,
struct task_struct *proxy_owner);
--
2.43.0
|