rhashtable_rehash_one() uses plain writes to update entry->next,
while it is being concurrently accessed by readers.
Unfortunately, the compiler is within its rights to (for example) use
byte-at-a-time writes to update the pointer, which would fatally confuse
concurrent readers.
Use WRITE_ONCE to update entry->next in rhashtable_rehash_one().
The data race was found with KernelThreadSanitizer (KTSAN).
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyu...@google.com>
---
KTSAN report for the record:
ThreadSanitizer: data-race in netlink_lookup
Atomic read at 0xffff880480443bd0 of size 8 by thread 2747 on CPU 11:
[< inline >] rhashtable_lookup_fast include/linux/rhashtable.h:543
[< inline >] __netlink_lookup net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1026
[<ffffffff81bd9a84>] netlink_lookup+0x134/0x1c0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1046
[< inline >] netlink_getsockbyportid net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1616
[<ffffffff81bdc701>] netlink_unicast+0x111/0x300 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1812
[<ffffffff81bdcdb9>] netlink_sendmsg+0x4c9/0x5f0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2443
[< inline >] sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:610
[<ffffffff81b5d6f3>] sock_sendmsg+0x83/0x90 net/socket.c:620
[<ffffffff81b5e59f>] ___sys_sendmsg+0x3cf/0x3e0 net/socket.c:1952
[<ffffffff81b5f6ac>] __sys_sendmsg+0x4c/0xb0 net/socket.c:1986
[< inline >] SYSC_sendmsg net/socket.c:1997
[<ffffffff81b5f740>] SyS_sendmsg+0x30/0x50 net/socket.c:1993
[<ffffffff81ee3e11>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x31/0x95
arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:188
Previous write at 0xffff880480443bd0 of size 8 by thread 213 on CPU 4:
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_one lib/rhashtable.c:193
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_chain lib/rhashtable.c:213
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_table lib/rhashtable.c:257
[<ffffffff8156f7e0>] rht_deferred_worker+0x3b0/0x6d0 lib/rhashtable.c:373
[<ffffffff810b1d6e>] process_one_work+0x47e/0x930 kernel/workqueue.c:2036
[<ffffffff810b22d0>] worker_thread+0xb0/0x900 kernel/workqueue.c:2170
[<ffffffff810bba40>] kthread+0x150/0x170 kernel/kthread.c:209
[<ffffffff81ee420f>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:529
Mutexes locked by thread 213:
Mutex 217217 is locked here:
[<ffffffff81ee0407>] mutex_lock+0x57/0x70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:108
[<ffffffff8156f475>] rht_deferred_worker+0x45/0x6d0 lib/rhashtable.c:363
[<ffffffff810b1d6e>] process_one_work+0x47e/0x930 kernel/workqueue.c:2036
[<ffffffff810b22d0>] worker_thread+0xb0/0x900 kernel/workqueue.c:2170
[<ffffffff810bba40>] kthread+0x150/0x170 kernel/kthread.c:209
[<ffffffff81ee420f>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:529
Mutex 431216 is locked here:
[< inline >] __raw_spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:149
[<ffffffff81ee3195>] _raw_spin_lock_bh+0x65/0x80 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:175
[< inline >] spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:317
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_chain lib/rhashtable.c:212
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_table lib/rhashtable.c:257
[<ffffffff8156f616>] rht_deferred_worker+0x1e6/0x6d0 lib/rhashtable.c:373
[<ffffffff810b1d6e>] process_one_work+0x47e/0x930 kernel/workqueue.c:2036
[<ffffffff810b22d0>] worker_thread+0xb0/0x900 kernel/workqueue.c:2170
[<ffffffff810bba40>] kthread+0x150/0x170 kernel/kthread.c:209
[<ffffffff81ee420f>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:529
Mutex 432766 is locked here:
[< inline >] __raw_spin_lock include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:158
[<ffffffff81ee37d0>] _raw_spin_lock+0x50/0x70 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:151
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_one lib/rhashtable.c:186
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_chain lib/rhashtable.c:213
[< inline >] rhashtable_rehash_table lib/rhashtable.c:257
[<ffffffff8156f79b>] rht_deferred_worker+0x36b/0x6d0 lib/rhashtable.c:373
[<ffffffff810b1d6e>] process_one_work+0x47e/0x930 kernel/workqueue.c:2036
[<ffffffff810b22d0>] worker_thread+0xb0/0x900 kernel/workqueue.c:2170
[<ffffffff810bba40>] kthread+0x150/0x170 kernel/kthread.c:209
[<ffffffff81ee420f>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:529
---
lib/rhashtable.c | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/rhashtable.c b/lib/rhashtable.c
index cc0c697..978624d 100644
--- a/lib/rhashtable.c
+++ b/lib/rhashtable.c
@@ -188,9 +188,12 @@ static int rhashtable_rehash_one(struct rhashtable *ht,
unsigned int old_hash)
new_tbl, new_hash);
if (rht_is_a_nulls(head))
- INIT_RHT_NULLS_HEAD(entry->next, ht, new_hash);
- else
- RCU_INIT_POINTER(entry->next, head);
+ head = (struct rhash_head *)rht_marker(ht, new_hash);
+ /* We don't insert any new nodes that were not previously accessible
+ * to readers, so we don't need to use rcu_assign_pointer().
+ * But entry is being concurrently accessed by readers, so we need to
+ * use at least WRITE_ONCE. */
+ WRITE_ONCE(entry->next, head);
rcu_assign_pointer(new_tbl->buckets[new_hash], entry);
spin_unlock(new_bucket_lock);
--
2.6.0.rc0.131.gf624c3d
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
