diff options
author | Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> | 2021-08-02 21:46:21 +0800 |
---|---|---|
committer | Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> | 2021-08-10 17:39:42 +0200 |
commit | 6255b40352498beb0309c99367542302711231e4 (patch) | |
tree | 2dec540ed5319db43befc5439b48de48ac928460 /kernel | |
parent | 6ef8ca1e4f08745b1e56b289bf418474becc937b (diff) |
futex: Handle transient "ownerless" rtmutex state correctly
[ Upstream commit 9f5d1c336a10c0d24e83e40b4c1b9539f7dba627 ]
Gratian managed to trigger the BUG_ON(!newowner) in fixup_pi_state_owner().
This is one possible chain of events leading to this:
Task Prio Operation
T1 120 lock(F)
T2 120 lock(F) -> blocks (top waiter)
T3 50 (RT) lock(F) -> boosts T1 and blocks (new top waiter)
XX timeout/ -> wakes T2
signal
T1 50 unlock(F) -> wakes T3 (rtmutex->owner == NULL, waiter bit is set)
T2 120 cleanup -> try_to_take_mutex() fails because T3 is the top waiter
and the lower priority T2 cannot steal the lock.
-> fixup_pi_state_owner() sees newowner == NULL -> BUG_ON()
The comment states that this is invalid and rt_mutex_real_owner() must
return a non NULL owner when the trylock failed, but in case of a queued
and woken up waiter rt_mutex_real_owner() == NULL is a valid transient
state. The higher priority waiter has simply not yet managed to take over
the rtmutex.
The BUG_ON() is therefore wrong and this is just another retry condition in
fixup_pi_state_owner().
Drop the locks, so that T3 can make progress, and then try the fixup again.
Gratian provided a great analysis, traces and a reproducer. The analysis is
to the point, but it confused the hell out of that tglx dude who had to
page in all the futex horrors again. Condensed version is above.
[ tglx: Wrote comment and changelog ]
Fixes: c1e2f0eaf015 ("futex: Avoid violating the 10th rule of futex")
Reported-by: Gratian Crisan <gratian.crisan@ni.com>
Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87a6w6x7bb.fsf@ni.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87sg9pkvf7.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Joe Korty <joe.korty@concurrent-rt.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel')
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/futex.c | 16 |
1 files changed, 14 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c index 8f6372d3a1fe..e7c2e552aef4 100644 --- a/kernel/futex.c +++ b/kernel/futex.c @@ -2437,10 +2437,22 @@ retry: } /* - * Since we just failed the trylock; there must be an owner. + * The trylock just failed, so either there is an owner or + * there is a higher priority waiter than this one. */ newowner = rt_mutex_owner(&pi_state->pi_mutex); - BUG_ON(!newowner); + /* + * If the higher priority waiter has not yet taken over the + * rtmutex then newowner is NULL. We can't return here with + * that state because it's inconsistent vs. the user space + * state. So drop the locks and try again. It's a valid + * situation and not any different from the other retry + * conditions. + */ + if (unlikely(!newowner)) { + err = -EAGAIN; + goto handle_fault; + } } else { WARN_ON_ONCE(argowner != current); if (oldowner == current) { |