From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Cc: "Igor Druzhinin" <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com,
stephen.s.brennan@oracle.com,
"Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: BUG in 1f3d87c75129 ("x86/vpt: do not take pt_migrate rwlock in some cases")
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 15:17:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e93fefae-a178-5fb9-1747-45d45818d66d@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3aaed845-b273-0688-4cac-3d440e3d58d3@citrix.com>
On 15.06.2021 11:17, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 15/06/2021 09:12, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 06:01:17PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 14.06.2021 15:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 01:53:09PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> x86/vpt: fully init timers before putting onto list
>>>>>
>>>>> With pt_vcpu_lock() no longer acquiring the pt_migrate lock, parties
>>>>> iterating the list and acting on the timers of the list entries will no
>>>>> longer be kept from entering their loops by create_periodic_time()'s
>>>>> holding of that lock. Therefore at least init_timer() needs calling
>>>>> ahead of list insertion, but keep this and set_timer() together.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 8113b02f0bf8 ("x86/vpt: do not take pt_migrate rwlock in some cases")
>>>>> Reported-by: Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>>> Thanks for looking into this so quickly, and sorry for not realizing
>>>> myself when relaxing the locking. Adding the timer to the list without
>>>> it being fully initialized was a latent issue even if protected by the
>>>> lock initially.
>>>>
>>>> Provided testing shows the issue is fixed:
>>> I guess the change here is needed anyway, even if testing finds there's
>>> still something amiss?
>> Indeed, just wondered whether there might be other instances using a
>> similar pattern, but I'm not able to spot any.
>>
>> It might even be better to fix other issues (if any) on a different
>> commit.
>
> To be honest, this change is clearly good, and necessary. I'd be
> tempted to commit it now, as is, irrespective of whether there are
> further bugs in this area.
Done.
Jan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-15 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-14 11:15 BUG in 1f3d87c75129 ("x86/vpt: do not take pt_migrate rwlock in some cases") Igor Druzhinin
2021-06-14 11:53 ` Jan Beulich
2021-06-14 13:27 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-06-14 16:01 ` Jan Beulich
2021-06-14 16:10 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-06-14 17:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2021-06-15 8:12 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-06-15 9:17 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-06-15 13:17 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
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=e93fefae-a178-5fb9-1747-45d45818d66d@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=igor.druzhinin@citrix.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=stephen.s.brennan@oracle.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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).