Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753541AbcDRKvJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 06:51:09 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:35393 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753001AbcDRKvE (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 06:51:04 -0400 From: lizf@kernel.org To: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kosuke Tatsukawa , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Zefan Li Subject: [PATCH 3.4 73/92] tty: fix stall caused by missing memory barrier in drivers/tty/n_tty.c Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:46:18 +0800 Message-Id: <1460976397-5688-73-git-send-email-lizf@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.1 In-Reply-To: <1460976338-5631-1-git-send-email-lizf@kernel.org> References: <1460976338-5631-1-git-send-email-lizf@kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 5666 Lines: 125 From: Kosuke Tatsukawa 3.4.112-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ commit e81107d4c6bd098878af9796b24edc8d4a9524fd upstream. My colleague ran into a program stall on a x86_64 server, where n_tty_read() was waiting for data even if there was data in the buffer in the pty. kernel stack for the stuck process looks like below. #0 [ffff88303d107b58] __schedule at ffffffff815c4b20 #1 [ffff88303d107bd0] schedule at ffffffff815c513e #2 [ffff88303d107bf0] schedule_timeout at ffffffff815c7818 #3 [ffff88303d107ca0] wait_woken at ffffffff81096bd2 #4 [ffff88303d107ce0] n_tty_read at ffffffff8136fa23 #5 [ffff88303d107dd0] tty_read at ffffffff81368013 #6 [ffff88303d107e20] __vfs_read at ffffffff811a3704 #7 [ffff88303d107ec0] vfs_read at ffffffff811a3a57 #8 [ffff88303d107f00] sys_read at ffffffff811a4306 #9 [ffff88303d107f50] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath at ffffffff815c86d7 There seems to be two problems causing this issue. First, in drivers/tty/n_tty.c, __receive_buf() stores the data and updates ldata->commit_head using smp_store_release() and then checks the wait queue using waitqueue_active(). However, since there is no memory barrier, __receive_buf() could return without calling wake_up_interactive_poll(), and at the same time, n_tty_read() could start to wait in wait_woken() as in the following chart. __receive_buf() n_tty_read() ------------------------------------------------------------------------ if (waitqueue_active(&tty->read_wait)) /* Memory operations issued after the RELEASE may be completed before the RELEASE operation has completed */ add_wait_queue(&tty->read_wait, &wait); ... if (!input_available_p(tty, 0)) { smp_store_release(&ldata->commit_head, ldata->read_head); ... timeout = wait_woken(&wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, timeout); ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The second problem is that n_tty_read() also lacks a memory barrier call and could also cause __receive_buf() to return without calling wake_up_interactive_poll(), and n_tty_read() to wait in wait_woken() as in the chart below. __receive_buf() n_tty_read() ------------------------------------------------------------------------ spin_lock_irqsave(&q->lock, flags); /* from add_wait_queue() */ ... if (!input_available_p(tty, 0)) { /* Memory operations issued after the RELEASE may be completed before the RELEASE operation has completed */ smp_store_release(&ldata->commit_head, ldata->read_head); if (waitqueue_active(&tty->read_wait)) __add_wait_queue(q, wait); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&q->lock,flags); /* from add_wait_queue() */ ... timeout = wait_woken(&wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, timeout); ------------------------------------------------------------------------ There are also other places in drivers/tty/n_tty.c which have similar calls to waitqueue_active(), so instead of adding many memory barrier calls, this patch simply removes the call to waitqueue_active(), leaving just wake_up*() behind. This fixes both problems because, even though the memory access before or after the spinlocks in both wake_up*() and add_wait_queue() can sneak into the critical section, it cannot go past it and the critical section assures that they will be serialized (please see "INTER-CPU ACQUIRING BARRIER EFFECTS" in Documentation/memory-barriers.txt for a better explanation). Moreover, the resulting code is much simpler. Latency measurement using a ping-pong test over a pty doesn't show any visible performance drop. Signed-off-by: Kosuke Tatsukawa Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman [lizf: Backported to 3.4: - adjust context - s/wake_up_interruptible_poll/wake_up_interruptible/ - drop changes to __receive_buf() and n_tty_set_termios()] Signed-off-by: Zefan Li --- drivers/tty/n_tty.c | 6 ++---- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c index fa0376b..fc8822f 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c +++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c @@ -1297,8 +1297,7 @@ handle_newline: tty->canon_data++; spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tty->read_lock, flags); kill_fasync(&tty->fasync, SIGIO, POLL_IN); - if (waitqueue_active(&tty->read_wait)) - wake_up_interruptible(&tty->read_wait); + wake_up_interruptible(&tty->read_wait); return; } } @@ -1421,8 +1420,7 @@ static void n_tty_receive_buf(struct tty_struct *tty, const unsigned char *cp, if ((!tty->icanon && (tty->read_cnt >= tty->minimum_to_wake)) || L_EXTPROC(tty)) { kill_fasync(&tty->fasync, SIGIO, POLL_IN); - if (waitqueue_active(&tty->read_wait)) - wake_up_interruptible(&tty->read_wait); + wake_up_interruptible(&tty->read_wait); } /* -- 1.9.1