From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
To: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Motohiro Kosaki <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Linux Kernel ML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] TASK_DEAD task is able to be woken up in special condition
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:14:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EF29276.5050309@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111222094241.C691.E1E9C6FF@jp.fujitsu.com>
(12/21/11 7:42 PM), Yasunori Goto wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I found TASK_DEAD task is able to be woken up in special condition.
> I would like to report this bug. Please check it.
>
> Here is the sequence how it occurs.
>
> ----------------------------------+-----------------------------
> |
> CPU A | CPU B
> ----------------------------------+-----------------------------
> TASK A calls exit()....
>
> do_exit()
>
> exit_mm()
> down_read(mm->mmap_sem);
>
> rwsem_down_failed_common()
>
> set TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
> set waiter.task<= task A
> list_add to sem->wait_list
> :
> raw_spin_unlock_irq()
> (I/O interruption occured)
>
> __rwsem_do_wake(mmap_sem)
>
> list_del(&waiter->list);
> waiter->task = NULL
> wake_up_process(task A)
> try_to_wake_up()
> (task is still
> TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
> p->on_rq is still 1.)
>
> ttwu_do_wakeup()
> (*A)
> :
> (I/O interruption handler finished)
>
> if (!waiter.task)
> schedule() is not called
> due to waiter.task is NULL.
>
> tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING
>
> :
> check_preempt_curr();
> :
> task->state = TASK_DEAD
> (*B)
> <--- set TASK_RUNNING (*C)
>
>
>
> schedule()
> (exit task is running again)
> BUG_ON() is called!
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> You probably think that execution time between (*A) and (*B) is very short,
> because the interruption is disabled, and setting TASK_RUNNING at (*C)
> must be executed before setting TASK_DEAD.
>
>
> HOWEVER, if SMI is interrupted between (*A) and (*B),
> (*C) is able to execute AFTER setting TASK_DEAD!
> Then, exited task is scheduled again, and BUG_ON() is called....
>
> This is very bad senario.
> But, I suppose this phenomenon is able to occur on a guest system of
> virtual machine too.
>
> Please fix it.
>
> I suppose task->pi_lock should be held when task->state is changed to
> TASK_DEAD like the following patch (not tested yet).
> Because try_to_wake_up() hold it before checking task state.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> ----
> Signed-off-by: Yasunori Goto<y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com>
>
> ---
> kernel/exit.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux-3.2-rc4/kernel/exit.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-3.2-rc4.orig/kernel/exit.c
> +++ linux-3.2-rc4/kernel/exit.c
> @@ -1038,8 +1038,11 @@ NORET_TYPE void do_exit(long code)
>
> preempt_disable();
> exit_rcu();
> +
> + spin_lock(&tsk->pi_lock, flags);
> /* causes final put_task_struct in finish_task_switch(). */
> tsk->state = TASK_DEAD;
> + spin_unlock(&tsk->pi_lock, flags);
> schedule();
> BUG();
> /* Avoid "noreturn function does return". */
I doubt it is not only TASK_DEAD issue, it is rwsem fundamental issue.
Because of, a lot of place assume "current->state = newstate" is safe
and don't need any synchronization. So, I'm worry about to lost
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE can make catastrophe like TASK_DEAD.
How about following patch? anyway, rwsem_down_failed_common() is
definitely slowpath. so killing micro optimization is not so much
problem, I guess.
diff --git a/lib/rwsem.c b/lib/rwsem.c
index 410aa11..e2a0c9a 100644
--- a/lib/rwsem.c
+++ b/lib/rwsem.c
@@ -208,9 +208,9 @@ rwsem_down_failed_common(struct rw_semaphore *sem,
/* wait to be given the lock */
for (;;) {
+ schedule();
if (!waiter.task)
break;
- schedule();
set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-22 2:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-22 0:42 [BUG] TASK_DEAD task is able to be woken up in special condition Yasunori Goto
2011-12-22 2:14 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2011-12-22 8:22 ` Yasunori Goto
2011-12-22 20:02 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-12-23 9:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-23 15:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-12-26 8:23 ` Yasunori Goto
2011-12-26 17:11 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-12-27 6:48 ` Yasunori Goto
2012-01-06 10:22 ` Yasunori Goto
2012-01-06 11:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-06 12:01 ` Yasunori Goto
2012-01-06 12:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-06 14:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-06 14:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-07 1:31 ` Yasunori Goto
2012-01-16 11:51 ` Yasunori Goto
2012-01-16 13:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-17 8:40 ` Yasunori Goto
2012-01-17 9:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-01-17 15:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-18 9:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-01-18 14:20 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-24 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-24 10:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-24 17:25 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-25 15:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-25 16:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-25 17:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-26 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-26 16:26 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-27 8:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-24 10:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-26 9:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-01-28 12:03 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Fix ancient race in do_exit() tip-bot for Yasunori Goto
2012-01-28 21:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-29 16:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-29 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-29 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-29 18:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-01-30 16:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-06 13:48 ` [BUG] TASK_DEAD task is able to be woken up in special condition Oleg Nesterov
2011-12-28 21:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-24 10:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-24 18:01 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-25 6:15 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-01-26 21:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-25 10:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-26 20:25 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Fix rq->nr_uninterruptible update race tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-27 5:20 ` Rakib Mullick
2012-01-27 8:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-27 14:11 ` Rakib Mullick
2012-01-26 21:21 ` [BUG] TASK_DEAD task is able to be woken up in special condition KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-27 8:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-26 6:52 ` Yasunori Goto
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=4EF29276.5050309@gmail.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=y-goto@jp.fujitsu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).