A non-first waiter can potentially spin in the for loop of
rwsem_down_write_slowpath() without sleeping but fail to acquire the
lock even if the rwsem is free if the following sequence happens:
Non-first RT waiter First waiter Lock holder
------------------- ------------ -----------
Acquire wait_lock
rwsem_try_write_lock():
Set handoff bit if RT or
wait too long
Set waiter->handoff_set
Release wait_lock
Acquire wait_lock
Inherit waiter->handoff_set
Release wait_lock
Clear owner
Release lock
if (waiter.handoff_set) {
rwsem_spin_on_owner(();
if (OWNER_NULL)
goto trylock_again;
}
trylock_again:
Acquire wait_lock
rwsem_try_write_lock():
if (first->handoff_set && (waiter != first))
return false;
Release wait_lock
A non-first waiter cannot really acquire the rwsem even if it mistakenly
believes that it can spin on OWNER_NULL value. If that waiter happens
to be an RT task running on the same CPU as the first waiter, it can
block the first waiter from acquiring the rwsem leading to live lock.
Fix this problem by making sure that a non-first waiter cannot spin in
the slowpath loop without sleeping.
Fixes: d257cc8cb8d5 ("locking/rwsem: Make handoff bit handling more consistent")
Reviewed-and-tested-by: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha(a)quicinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman(a)redhat.com>
Cc: stable(a)vger.kernel.org
---
kernel/locking/rwsem.c | 19 +++++++++----------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
index 44873594de03..be2df9ea7c30 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
@@ -624,18 +624,16 @@ static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock(struct rw_semaphore *sem,
*/
if (first->handoff_set && (waiter != first))
return false;
-
- /*
- * First waiter can inherit a previously set handoff
- * bit and spin on rwsem if lock acquisition fails.
- */
- if (waiter == first)
- waiter->handoff_set = true;
}
new = count;
if (count & RWSEM_LOCK_MASK) {
+ /*
+ * A waiter (first or not) can set the handoff bit
+ * if it is an RT task or wait in the wait queue
+ * for too long.
+ */
if (has_handoff || (!rt_task(waiter->task) &&
!time_after(jiffies, waiter->timeout)))
return false;
@@ -651,11 +649,12 @@ static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock(struct rw_semaphore *sem,
} while (!atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_acquire(&sem->count, &count, new));
/*
- * We have either acquired the lock with handoff bit cleared or
- * set the handoff bit.
+ * We have either acquired the lock with handoff bit cleared or set
+ * the handoff bit. Only the first waiter can have its handoff_set
+ * set here to enable optimistic spinning in slowpath loop.
*/
if (new & RWSEM_FLAG_HANDOFF) {
- waiter->handoff_set = true;
+ first->handoff_set = true;
lockevent_inc(rwsem_wlock_handoff);
return false;
}
--
2.31.1
Good morning,
Happy New Year my friend, how are you doing? My names are Hongu Almond
a humble citizen of United States of America I have a mandate in this
2023 to carry out a transaction and I choose you profitable please
write me back for more details.
Your friend
Mr.Hongu Almond
As described in the following commit info, new_opts value is not used
anymore and is not cleaned on non-error paths -- it is a leak. The problem
has been fixed by the following patch which can be cleanly applied
to 4.14, 4.19, 5.4, 5.10, 5.15 branches.