-
- Downloads
fs/pipe: Read pipe->{head,tail} atomically outside pipe->mutex
pipe_readable(), pipe_writable(), and pipe_poll() can read "pipe->head" and "pipe->tail" outside of "pipe->mutex" critical section. When the head and the tail are read individually in that order, there is a window for interruption between the two reads in which both the head and the tail can be updated by concurrent readers and writers. One of the problematic scenarios observed with hackbench running multiple groups on a large server on a particular pipe inode is as follows: pipe->head = 36 pipe->tail = 36 hackbench-118762 [057] ..... 1029.550548: pipe_write: *wakes up: pipe not full* hackbench-118762 [057] ..... 1029.550548: pipe_write: head: 36 -> 37 [tail: 36] hackbench-118762 [057] ..... 1029.550548: pipe_write: *wake up next reader 118740* hackbench-118762 [057] ..... 1029.550548: pipe_write: *wake up next writer 118768* hackbench-118768 [206] ..... 1029.55055X: pipe_write: *writer wakes up* hackbench-118768 [206] ..... 1029.55055X: pipe_write: head = READ_ONCE(pipe->head) [37] ... CPU 206 interrupted (exact wakeup was not traced but 118768 did read head at 37 in traces) hackbench-118740 [057] ..... 1029.550558: pipe_read: *reader wakes up: pipe is not empty* hackbench-118740 [057] ..... 1029.550558: pipe_read: tail: 36 -> 37 [head = 37] hackbench-118740 [057] ..... 1029.550559: pipe_read: *pipe is empty; wakeup writer 118768* hackbench-118740 [057] ..... 1029.550559: pipe_read: *sleeps* hackbench-118766 [185] ..... 1029.550592: pipe_write: *New writer comes in* hackbench-118766 [185] ..... 1029.550592: pipe_write: head: 37 -> 38 [tail: 37] hackbench-118766 [185] ..... 1029.550592: pipe_write: *wakes up reader 118766* hackbench-118740 [185] ..... 1029.550598: pipe_read: *reader wakes up; pipe not empty* hackbench-118740 [185] ..... 1029.550599: pipe_read: tail: 37 -> 38 [head: 38] hackbench-118740 [185] ..... 1029.550599: pipe_read: *pipe is empty* hackbench-118740 [185] ..... 1029.550599: pipe_read: *reader sleeps; wakeup writer 118768* ... CPU 206 switches back to writer hackbench-118768 [206] ..... 1029.550601: pipe_write: tail = READ_ONCE(pipe->tail) [38] hackbench-118768 [206] ..... 1029.550601: pipe_write: pipe_full()? (u32)(37 - 38) >= 16? Yes hackbench-118768 [206] ..... 1029.550601: pipe_write: *writer goes back to sleep* [ Tasks 118740 and 118768 can then indefinitely wait on each other. ] The unsigned arithmetic in pipe_occupancy() wraps around when "pipe->tail > pipe->head" leading to pipe_full() returning true despite the pipe being empty. The case of genuine wraparound of "pipe->head" is handled since pipe buffer has data allowing readers to make progress until the pipe->tail wraps too after which the reader will wakeup a sleeping writer, however, mistaking the pipe to be full when it is in fact empty can lead to readers and writers waiting on each other indefinitely. This issue became more problematic and surfaced as a hang in hackbench after the optimization in commit aaec5a95 ("pipe_read: don't wake up the writer if the pipe is still full") significantly reduced the number of spurious wakeups of writers that had previously helped mask the issue. To avoid missing any updates between the reads of "pipe->head" and "pipe->write", unionize the two with a single unsigned long "pipe->head_tail" member that can be loaded atomically. Using "pipe->head_tail" to read the head and the tail ensures the lockless checks do not miss any updates to the head or the tail and since those two are only updated under "pipe->mutex", it ensures that the head is always ahead of, or equal to the tail resulting in correct calculations. [ prateek: commit log, testing on x86 platforms. ] Reported-and-debugged-by:Swapnil Sapkal <swapnil.sapkal@amd.com> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e813814e-7094-4673-bc69-731af065a0eb@amd.com/ Reported-by:
Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Z8Wn0nTvevLRG_4m@example.org/ Fixes: 8cefc107 ("pipe: Use head and tail pointers for the ring, not cursor and length") Tested-by:
Swapnil Sapkal <swapnil.sapkal@amd.com> Reviewed-by:
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Tested-by:
Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org> Signed-off-by:
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com> Signed-off-by:
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Loading
-
mentioned in commit vigneshraman/linux@ebb0f38b
-
mentioned in commit vigneshraman/linux@d810d4c2
Please register or sign in to comment