Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] random: Blocking API for accessing nonblocking_pool

[Herbert Xu]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:18:05PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 09:50:28AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> >
> > Finally, this is only going to block *once*, when the system is
> > initially botting up.  Why is it so important that we get the
> > asynchronous nature of this right, and why can't we solve it simply by
> > just simply doing the work in a workqueue, with a completion barrier
> > getting triggered once /dev/random initializes itself, and just simply
> > blocking the module unload until /dev/random is initialized?
> 
> I guess I'm still thinking of the old work queue code before
> Tejun's cmwq work.  Yes blocking in a work queue should be fine
> as there is usually just one DRBG instance.

It looks like waiting for it in a workqueue isn't good enough
after all.  I just got this in a KVM machine:

INFO: task kworker/0:1:121 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
      Tainted: G           O    4.1.0-rc1+ #34
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
kworker/0:1     D ffff88001eb47d18     0   121      2 0x00000000
Workqueue: events drbg_async_seed [drbg]
 ffff88001eb47d18 ffff88001e1bcec0 ffff88001eb84010 0000000000000246
 ffff88001eb48000 0000000000000020 ffff88001d54ea50 0000000000000000
 ffff88001f613080 ffff88001eb47d38 ffffffff813fe692 0000000000000020
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff813fe692>] schedule+0x32/0x80
 [<ffffffff812c1415>] get_blocking_random_bytes+0x65/0xa0
 [<ffffffff810825e0>] ? add_wait_queue+0x60/0x60
 [<ffffffffa03dd14c>] drbg_async_seed+0x2c/0xc0 [drbg]
 [<ffffffff81063369>] process_one_work+0x129/0x310
 [<ffffffff810636a9>] worker_thread+0x119/0x430
 [<ffffffff813fe51b>] ? __schedule+0x7fb/0x85e
 [<ffffffff81063590>] ? process_scheduled_works+0x40/0x40
 [<ffffffff81068ed4>] kthread+0xc4/0xe0
 [<ffffffff81060000>] ? proc_cap_handler+0x180/0x1b0
 [<ffffffff81068e10>] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x60/0x60
 [<ffffffff81401ee2>] ret_from_fork+0x42/0x70
 [<ffffffff81068e10>] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x60/0x60

Steffen, I think we need to revisit the idea of having a list
of callbacks.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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/