diff options
author | Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> | 2013-08-12 18:14:00 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> | 2013-08-13 08:19:26 -0700 |
commit | e0acd0a68ec7dbf6b7a81a87a867ebd7ac9b76c4 (patch) | |
tree | 0421e55e2d74024f1ee1949ccdd4cd92765b2560 | |
parent | 584d88b2cd3b60507e708d2452651e4d3caa1b81 (diff) | |
download | op-kernel-dev-e0acd0a68ec7dbf6b7a81a87a867ebd7ac9b76c4.zip op-kernel-dev-e0acd0a68ec7dbf6b7a81a87a867ebd7ac9b76c4.tar.gz |
sched: fix the theoretical signal_wake_up() vs schedule() race
This is only theoretical, but after try_to_wake_up(p) was changed
to check p->state under p->pi_lock the code like
__set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
schedule();
can miss a signal. This is the special case of wait-for-condition,
it relies on try_to_wake_up/schedule interaction and thus it does
not need mb() between __set_current_state() and if(signal_pending).
However, this __set_current_state() can move into the critical
section protected by rq->lock, now that try_to_wake_up() takes
another lock we need to ensure that it can't be reordered with
"if (signal_pending(current))" check inside that section.
The patch is actually one-liner, it simply adds smp_wmb() before
spin_lock_irq(rq->lock). This is what try_to_wake_up() already
does by the same reason.
We turn this wmb() into the new helper, smp_mb__before_spinlock(),
for better documentation and to allow the architectures to change
the default implementation.
While at it, kill smp_mb__after_lock(), it has no callers.
Perhaps we can also add smp_mb__before/after_spinunlock() for
prepare_to_wait().
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
-rw-r--r-- | arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h | 4 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | include/linux/spinlock.h | 14 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/sched/core.c | 14 |
3 files changed, 24 insertions, 8 deletions
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h index 33692ea..e3ddd7d 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h @@ -233,8 +233,4 @@ static inline void arch_write_unlock(arch_rwlock_t *rw) #define arch_read_relax(lock) cpu_relax() #define arch_write_relax(lock) cpu_relax() -/* The {read|write|spin}_lock() on x86 are full memory barriers. */ -static inline void smp_mb__after_lock(void) { } -#define ARCH_HAS_SMP_MB_AFTER_LOCK - #endif /* _ASM_X86_SPINLOCK_H */ diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h index 7d537ce..75f3494 100644 --- a/include/linux/spinlock.h +++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h @@ -117,9 +117,17 @@ do { \ #endif /*arch_spin_is_contended*/ #endif -/* The lock does not imply full memory barrier. */ -#ifndef ARCH_HAS_SMP_MB_AFTER_LOCK -static inline void smp_mb__after_lock(void) { smp_mb(); } +/* + * Despite its name it doesn't necessarily has to be a full barrier. + * It should only guarantee that a STORE before the critical section + * can not be reordered with a LOAD inside this section. + * spin_lock() is the one-way barrier, this LOAD can not escape out + * of the region. So the default implementation simply ensures that + * a STORE can not move into the critical section, smp_wmb() should + * serialize it with another STORE done by spin_lock(). + */ +#ifndef smp_mb__before_spinlock +#define smp_mb__before_spinlock() smp_wmb() #endif /** diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c index b7c32cb..ef51b0e 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@ -1491,7 +1491,13 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int state, int wake_flags) unsigned long flags; int cpu, success = 0; - smp_wmb(); + /* + * If we are going to wake up a thread waiting for CONDITION we + * need to ensure that CONDITION=1 done by the caller can not be + * reordered with p->state check below. This pairs with mb() in + * set_current_state() the waiting thread does. + */ + smp_mb__before_spinlock(); raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags); if (!(p->state & state)) goto out; @@ -2394,6 +2400,12 @@ need_resched: if (sched_feat(HRTICK)) hrtick_clear(rq); + /* + * Make sure that signal_pending_state()->signal_pending() below + * can't be reordered with __set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) + * done by the caller to avoid the race with signal_wake_up(). + */ + smp_mb__before_spinlock(); raw_spin_lock_irq(&rq->lock); switch_count = &prev->nivcsw; |