Re: [Bugfix 4/5] x86/irq: Fix a race condition between vector assigning and cleanup

[Joe Lawrence]

On 12/01/2015 05:46 PM, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 11/30/2015 03:09 AM, Jiang Liu wrote:
> > Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@xxxxxxxxxxx> reported an use after release
> > issue related to x86 IRQ management code. Please refer to following
> > link for more information:
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg1026840.html
> >
> > Thomas pointed out that it's caused by a race condition between
> > __assign_irq_vector() and __send_cleanup_vector(). Based on Thomas'
> > draft patch, we solve this race condition by:
> > 1) Use move_in_progress to signal that an IRQ cleanup IPI is needed
> > 2) Use old_domain to save old CPU mask for IRQ cleanup
> > 3) Use vector to protect move_in_progress and old_domain
> >
> > This bugfix patch also helps to get rid of that atomic allocation in
> > __send_cleanup_vector().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
>
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
> Jiang, Thomas,
>
> Last night I ran with Jiang's five-patch-set on top of 4.3.  Tests
> started with regular sysfs device removal of mpt HBAs, then later I
> added disk stress (the disks are software RAID1 across the HBAs) .. no
> issues.
>
> I'll kick off some tougher surprise device removal tests tonight to
> further kick the tires.

Testing looked good.  Feel to add a Tested-by and/or Reported-by.

Thanks,

-- Joe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/