From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: cael <juanfengpy@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
linux-serial <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: tty: fix a possible hang on tty device
Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 15:37:51 +0300 (EEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <857fdbc-acc2-de4-fe2e-229b7a175ad@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPmgiUK=aTDJjPYooQGDbNvdOs+z6AbAj5zU7e_0SJhSk2pz9w@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4823 bytes --]
On Mon, 30 May 2022, cael wrote:
> Thanks, You are right, barrier is needed here. I changed the patch as follows:
> 1) WRITE_ONCE and READ_ONCE is used to access ldata->no_room since
> n_tty_kick_worker would be called in kworker and reader cpu;
> 2) smp_mb added in chars_in_buffer as this function will be called in
> reader and kworker, accessing commit_head and read_tail; and to make
> sure that read_tail is not read before setting no_room in
> n_tty_receive_buf_common;
> 3) smp_mb added in n_tty_read to make sure that no_room is not read
> before setting read_tail.
Please include proper changelog to all revised patch submissions, not
just list of changes you've made (and properly version the submissions
with [PATCH v2] etc. in the subject).
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> index efc72104c840..3327687da0d3 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> @@ -201,8 +201,8 @@ static void n_tty_kick_worker(struct tty_struct *tty)
> struct n_tty_data *ldata = tty->disc_data;
>
> /* Did the input worker stop? Restart it */
> - if (unlikely(ldata->no_room)) {
> - ldata->no_room = 0;
> + if (unlikely(READ_ONCE(ldata->no_room))) {
> + WRITE_ONCE(ldata->no_room, 0);
> WARN_RATELIMIT(tty->port->itty == NULL,
> "scheduling with invalid itty\n");
> @@ -221,6 +221,7 @@ static ssize_t chars_in_buffer(struct tty_struct *tty)
> struct n_tty_data *ldata = tty->disc_data;
> ssize_t n = 0;
>
> + smp_mb();
You should add the reason in comment for any barriers you add.
> if (!ldata->icanon)
> n = ldata->commit_head - ldata->read_tail;
> else
> @@ -1632,7 +1633,7 @@ n_tty_receive_buf_common(struct tty_struct *tty,
> const unsigned char *cp,
> if (overflow && room < 0)
> ldata->read_head--;
> room = overflow;
> - ldata->no_room = flow && !room;
> + WRITE_ONCE(ldata->no_room, flow && !room);
> } else
> overflow = 0;
>
> @@ -1663,6 +1664,9 @@ n_tty_receive_buf_common(struct tty_struct *tty,
> const unsigned char *cp,
> } else
> n_tty_check_throttle(tty);
>
> + if (!chars_in_buffer(tty))
> + n_tty_kick_worker(tty);
> +
Instead of having the barrier in chars_in_buffer() perhaps it would be
more obvious what's going on here and also scope down to the cases where
the barrier might be needed in the first place if you'd do:
if (ldata->no_room) {
/* ... */
smp_mb();
if (!chars_in_buffer(tty))
n_tty_kick_worker(tty);
}
--
i.
> up_read(&tty->termios_rwsem);
>
> return rcvd;
> @@ -2180,8 +2184,10 @@ static ssize_t n_tty_read(struct tty_struct
> *tty, struct file *file,
> if (time)
> timeout = time;
> }
> - if (tail != ldata->read_tail)
> + if (tail != ldata->read_tail) {
> + smp_mb();
> n_tty_kick_worker(tty);
> + }
> up_read(&tty->termios_rwsem);
>
> remove_wait_queue(&tty->read_wait, &wait);
> --
> 2.27.0
>
> Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> 于2022年5月25日周三 19:21写道:
> >
> > On Wed, 25 May 2022, cael wrote:
> >
> > > >Now you switched to an entirely different case, not the one we were
> > > >talking about. ...There is no ldisc->no_room = true race in the case
> > > >you now described.
> > > So, I think we should back to the case ldata->no_room=true as
> > > ldata->no_room=false seems harmless.
> > >
> > > >I'm not worried about the case where both cpus call n_tty_kick_worker but
> > > >the case where producer cpu sees chars_in_buffer() > 0 and consumer cpu
> > > >!no_room.
> > >
> > > As ldata->no_room=true is set before checking chars_in_buffer()
> >
> > Please take a brief look at Documentation/memory-barriers.txt and then
> > tell me if you still find this claim to be true.
> >
> > > if producer
> > > finds chars_in_buffer() > 0, then if reader is currently in n_tty_read,
> >
> > ...Then please do a similar analysis for ldata->read_tail. What guarantees
> > its update is seen by the producer cpu when the reader is already past the
> > point you think it still must be in?
> >
> > > when reader quits n_tty_read, n_tty_kick_worker will be called. If reader
> > > has already exited n_tty_read, which means that reader still has data to read,
> > > next time reader will call n_tty_kick_worker inside n_tty_read too.
> >
> > C-level analysis alone is not going to be very useful here given you're
> > dealing with a concurrency challenge here.
> >
> >
> > --
> > i.
> >
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-31 12:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-24 2:21 tty: fix a possible hang on tty device cael
2022-05-24 9:11 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2022-05-24 11:09 ` cael
2022-05-24 11:40 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2022-05-24 12:47 ` cael
2022-05-24 13:25 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2022-05-25 10:36 ` cael
2022-05-25 11:21 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2022-05-30 13:13 ` cael
2022-05-31 12:37 ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2022-06-01 9:38 ` Greg KH
2022-06-01 13:39 ` cael
2022-06-01 14:47 ` Greg KH
2022-06-01 15:28 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2022-06-06 13:40 ` cael
2022-06-06 14:43 ` Greg KH
2022-06-11 6:50 ` cael
2022-06-11 7:32 ` Greg KH
2022-06-13 12:30 ` [PATCH v3] tty: fix hang on tty device with no_room set juanfengpy
2022-06-13 17:20 ` Greg KH
2022-06-15 3:45 ` [PATCH v4] " cael
2022-06-15 5:00 ` Greg KH
2022-06-15 7:57 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2022-06-15 9:29 ` Greg KH
2022-06-15 11:17 ` [PATCH v5] " cael
2022-06-15 11:29 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2022-06-15 13:33 ` caelli
2022-06-27 12:05 ` Greg KH
2022-06-27 13:53 ` [PATCH v6] " juanfengpy
2023-03-17 2:41 ` [PATCH v7] " juanfengpy
2023-03-17 6:32 ` Jiri Slaby
2023-03-17 7:25 ` [PATCH v8] " juanfengpy
2023-04-06 2:44 ` [PATCH v9] " juanfengpy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-05-07 9:11 tty: fix a possible hang on tty device cael
2022-05-17 10:22 ` Greg KH
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=857fdbc-acc2-de4-fe2e-229b7a175ad@linux.intel.com \
--to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
--cc=juanfengpy@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-serial@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 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).