1. 18 Apr, 2017 5 commits
  2. 12 Apr, 2017 33 commits
  3. 08 Apr, 2017 2 commits
    • Greg Kroah-Hartman's avatar
      Linux 4.4.60 · 8f8ee970
      Greg Kroah-Hartman authored
      8f8ee970
    • Jason A. Donenfeld's avatar
      padata: avoid race in reordering · 84bd21a7
      Jason A. Donenfeld authored
      commit de5540d0 upstream.
      
      Under extremely heavy uses of padata, crashes occur, and with list
      debugging turned on, this happens instead:
      
      [87487.298728] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 882 at lib/list_debug.c:33
      __list_add+0xae/0x130
      [87487.301868] list_add corruption. prev->next should be next
      (ffffb17abfc043d0), but was ffff8dba70872c80. (prev=ffff8dba70872b00).
      [87487.339011]  [<ffffffff9a53d075>] dump_stack+0x68/0xa3
      [87487.342198]  [<ffffffff99e119a1>] ? console_unlock+0x281/0x6d0
      [87487.345364]  [<ffffffff99d6b91f>] __warn+0xff/0x140
      [87487.348513]  [<ffffffff99d6b9aa>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x4a/0x50
      [87487.351659]  [<ffffffff9a58b5de>] __list_add+0xae/0x130
      [87487.354772]  [<ffffffff9add5094>] ? _raw_spin_lock+0x64/0x70
      [87487.357915]  [<ffffffff99eefd66>] padata_reorder+0x1e6/0x420
      [87487.361084]  [<ffffffff99ef0055>] padata_do_serial+0xa5/0x120
      
      padata_reorder calls list_add_tail with the list to which its adding
      locked, which seems correct:
      
      spin_lock(&squeue->serial.lock);
      list_add_tail(&padata->list, &squeue->serial.list);
      spin_unlock(&squeue->serial.lock);
      
      This therefore leaves only place where such inconsistency could occur:
      if padata->list is added at the same time on two different threads.
      This pdata pointer comes from the function call to
      padata_get_next(pd), which has in it the following block:
      
      next_queue = per_cpu_ptr(pd->pqueue, cpu);
      padata = NULL;
      reorder = &next_queue->reorder;
      if (!list_empty(&reorder->list)) {
             padata = list_entry(reorder->list.next,
                                 struct padata_priv, list);
             spin_lock(&reorder->lock);
             list_del_init(&padata->list);
             atomic_dec(&pd->reorder_objects);
             spin_unlock(&reorder->lock);
      
             pd->processed++;
      
             goto out;
      }
      out:
      return padata;
      
      I strongly suspect that the problem here is that two threads can race
      on reorder list. Even though the deletion is locked, call to
      list_entry is not locked, which means it's feasible that two threads
      pick up the same padata object and subsequently call list_add_tail on
      them at the same time. The fix is thus be hoist that lock outside of
      that block.
      Signed-off-by: default avatarJason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
      Acked-by: default avatarSteffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarHerbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
      84bd21a7