Re: [PATCH] percpu_rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load

[Andrea Parri]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 12:59:13PM +0530, Prateek Sood wrote:
> P1 is releaseing the cpu_hotplug_lock and P2 is acquiring
> cpu_hotplug_lock.
> 
> P1                                               P2
> percpu_up_read() path                      percpu_down_write() path
> 
>                                           rcu_sync_enter() //gp_state=GP_PASSED
> 
> rcu_sync_is_idle() //returns false        down_write(rw_sem)
> 
> __percpu_up_read()
> 
> [L] task = rcu_dereference(w->task) //NULL
> 
> smp_rmb()                                  [S] w->task = current
> 
>                                             smp_mb()
> 
>                                            [L] readers_active_check() //fails
> 					     schedule()
> 
> [S] __this_cpu_dec(read_count)
> 
> Since load of task can result in NULL, it can lead to missed wakeup
> in rcuwait_wake_up(). Above sequence violated the following constraint
> in rcuwait_wake_up():
> 
> 	 WAIT                WAKE
> [S] tsk = current	  [S] cond = true
> MB (A)	                    MB (B)
> [L] cond		  [L] tsk
> 
> This can happen as smp_rmb() in rcuwait_wake_up() will provide ordering
> of load before barrier with load and store after barrier for arm64
> architecture. Here the requirement is to order store before smp_rmb()
> with load after the smp_rmb().
> 
> For the usage of rcuwait_wake_up() in __percpu_up_read() full barrier
> (smp_mb) is required to complete the constraint of rcuwait_wake_up().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Prateek Sood <prsood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@xxxxxxx>

It looks like Peter has already queued this, c.f.,

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git/commit/?h=locking/core&id=73685b8af253cf32b1b41b3045f2828c6fb2439e

with a modified changelog and my Reviewed-by (that I confirm).

I can't tell how/when this is going to be upstreamed (guess via -tip),
Peter?

  Andrea


> 
> ---
>  kernel/exit.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/exit.c b/kernel/exit.c
> index ac1a814..696e0e1 100644
> --- a/kernel/exit.c
> +++ b/kernel/exit.c
> @@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ void rcuwait_wake_up(struct rcuwait *w)
>  	/*
>  	 * Order condition vs @task, such that everything prior to the load
>  	 * of @task is visible. This is the condition as to why the user called
> -	 * rcuwait_trywake() in the first place. Pairs with set_current_state()
> +	 * rcuwait_wake_up() in the first place. Pairs with set_current_state()
>  	 * barrier (A) in rcuwait_wait_event().
>  	 *
>  	 *    WAIT                WAKE
> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ void rcuwait_wake_up(struct rcuwait *w)
>  	 *        MB (A)	      MB (B)
>  	 *    [L] cond		  [L] tsk
>  	 */
> -	smp_rmb(); /* (B) */
> +	smp_mb(); /* (B) */
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Avoid using task_rcu_dereference() magic as long as we are careful,
> -- 
> Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., 
> is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
>