All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@suse.de>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc: Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@suse.de>,
	Max Neunhoeffer <max@arangodb.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	Christopher Kohlhoff <chris.kohlhoff@clearpool.io>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>, Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] epoll: fix possible lost wakeup on epoll_ctl() path
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:02:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200214170211.561524-1-rpenyaev@suse.de> (raw)

This fixes possible lost wakeup introduced by the a218cc491420.
Originally modifications to ep->wq were serialized by ep->wq.lock,
but in the a218cc491420 new rw lock was introduced in order to
relax fd event path, i.e. callers of ep_poll_callback() function.

After the change ep_modify and ep_insert (both are called on
epoll_ctl() path) were switched to ep->lock, but ep_poll
(epoll_wait) was using ep->wq.lock on wqueue list modification.

The bug doesn't lead to any wqueue list corruptions, because wake up
path and list modifications were serialized by ep->wq.lock
internally, but actual waitqueue_active() check prior wake_up()
call can be reordered with modifications of ep ready list, thus
wake up can be lost.

And yes, can be healed by explicit smp_mb():

  list_add_tail(&epi->rdlink, &ep->rdllist);
  smp_mb();
  if (waitqueue_active(&ep->wq))
	wake_up(&ep->wp);

But let's make it simple, thus current patch replaces ep->wq.lock
with the ep->lock for wqueue modifications, thus wake up path
always observes activeness of the wqueue correcty.

Fixes: a218cc491420 ("epoll: use rwlock in order to reduce ep_poll_callback() contention")
References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205933
Signed-off-by: Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@suse.de>
Reported-by: Max Neunhoeffer <max@arangodb.com>
Bisected-by: Max Neunhoeffer <max@arangodb.com>
Tested-by: Max Neunhoeffer <max@arangodb.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Christopher Kohlhoff <chris.kohlhoff@clearpool.io>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org  #5.1+
---
 Nothing was changed in v3
 Nothing interesting in v2:
     changed the comment a bit and specified Reported-by and Bisected-by tags

 fs/eventpoll.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c
index b041b66002db..eee3c92a9ebf 100644
--- a/fs/eventpoll.c
+++ b/fs/eventpoll.c
@@ -1854,9 +1854,9 @@ static int ep_poll(struct eventpoll *ep, struct epoll_event __user *events,
 		waiter = true;
 		init_waitqueue_entry(&wait, current);
 
-		spin_lock_irq(&ep->wq.lock);
+		write_lock_irq(&ep->lock);
 		__add_wait_queue_exclusive(&ep->wq, &wait);
-		spin_unlock_irq(&ep->wq.lock);
+		write_unlock_irq(&ep->lock);
 	}
 
 	for (;;) {
@@ -1904,9 +1904,9 @@ static int ep_poll(struct eventpoll *ep, struct epoll_event __user *events,
 		goto fetch_events;
 
 	if (waiter) {
-		spin_lock_irq(&ep->wq.lock);
+		write_lock_irq(&ep->lock);
 		__remove_wait_queue(&ep->wq, &wait);
-		spin_unlock_irq(&ep->wq.lock);
+		write_unlock_irq(&ep->lock);
 	}
 
 	return res;
-- 
2.24.1


             reply	other threads:[~2020-02-14 17:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-14 17:02 Roman Penyaev [this message]
2020-02-14 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] kselftest: introduce new epoll test case Roman Penyaev

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=20200214170211.561524-1-rpenyaev@suse.de \
    --to=rpenyaev@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris.kohlhoff@clearpool.io \
    --cc=dbueso@suse.de \
    --cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=max@arangodb.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.