Re: [patch, validator] fix proc_subdir_lock related deadlock

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Jan 25 2006 - 13:22:40 EST


Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > proc_subdir_lock can also be used from softirq (tasklet) context, which
> > > may lead to deadlocks.
> > >
> > > This bug was found via the lock validator:
> > >
> >
> > Thanks Ingo,
> >
> > I stressed in sending the patch that there was a big assumption that
> > the calls would not be done in (soft)irq context. I just didn't want
> > to add overhead if it wasn't needed. But I guess that this is needed
> > until we can remove all the instances that use it in softirq context.
> > But that's for a later patch.
>
> the validator just found another problem with this lock, pointing out
> that files_lock nests inside of proc_subdir_lock, and that files_lock is
> a softirq-unsafe lock, creating another (unlikely but possible) deadlock
> scenario:

files_lock can be taken on the free_irq() path: proc_kill_inodes().

> ...
> to solve this we must either change files_lock to be softirq-safe too
> (bleh!), or we must forbid remove_proc_entry() use from softirq
> contexts. Neither is a happy solution - remove_proc_entry() is used
> within free_irq(), and who knows how many drivers do free_irq() in
> softirq/tasklet context ...

free_irq()'s /proc fiddling has always been a pain - we just shouldn't be
doing filesystem things in irq/bh context.

> Andrew, this needs to be resolved before v2.6.16, correct? Steve's patch
> solves a real bug in the upstream kernel.

It's not a very big bug - I think only Steve hit it, and that with a
stress-test which was somewhat tuned to hit it.

So we can afford to sit on the problem for a while, as long as someone is
working on a broader /proc-sanity fix. But nobody will do that.

I wonder if we can just punt the unregister_handler_proc/kfree up to a
keventd callback.
-
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/