user/sven/linux.git/kernel/locking, branch v5.10.180

locking/lockdep: Fix lockdep_init_map_*() confusion

2022-08-21T13:15:33Z

[ Upstream commit eae6d58d67d9739be5f7ae2dbead1d0ef6528243 ] Commit dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t") added yet another lockdep_init_map_*() variant, but forgot to update all the existing users of the most complicated version. This could lead to a loss of lock_type and hence an incorrect report. Given the relative rarity of both local_lock and these annotations, this is unlikely to happen in practise, still, best fix things. Fixes: dfd5e3f5fe27 ("locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t") Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YqyEDtoan20K0CVD@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

lockdep: Allow tuning tracing capacity constants.

2022-08-21T13:15:27Z

commit 5dc33592e95534dc8455ce3e9baaaf3dae0fff82 upstream. Since syzkaller continues various test cases until the kernel crashes, syzkaller tends to examine more locking dependencies than normal systems. As a result, syzbot is reporting that the fuzz testing was terminated due to hitting upper limits lockdep can track [1] [2] [3]. Since analysis via /proc/lockdep* did not show any obvious culprit [4] [5], we have no choice but allow tuning tracing capacity constants. [1] https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=3d97ba93fb3566000c1c59691ea427370d33ea1b [2] https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=381cb436fe60dc03d7fd2a092b46d7f09542a72a [3] https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=a588183ac34c1437fc0785e8f220e88282e5a29f [4] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/4b8f7a57-fa20-47bd-48a0-ae35d860f233@i-love.sakura.ne.jp [5] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1c351187-253b-2d49-acaf-4563c63ae7d2@i-love.sakura.ne.jp References: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1595640639-9310-1-git-send-email-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa Acked-by: Dmitry Vyukov Signed-off-by: Alexey Khoroshilov Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

locking/lockdep: Iterate lock_classes directly when reading lockdep files

2022-04-08T12:40:32Z

[ Upstream commit fb7275acd6fb988313dddd8d3d19efa70d9015ad ] When dumping lock_classes information via /proc/lockdep, we can't take the lockdep lock as the lock hold time is indeterminate. Iterating over all_lock_classes without holding lock can be dangerous as there is a slight chance that it may branch off to other lists leading to infinite loop or even access invalid memory if changes are made to all_lock_classes list in parallel. To avoid this problem, iteration of lock classes is now done directly on the lock_classes array itself. The lock_classes_in_use bitmap is checked to see if the lock class is being used. To avoid iterating the full array all the times, a new max_lock_class_idx value is added to track the maximum lock_class index that is currently being used. We can theoretically take the lockdep lock for iterating all_lock_classes when other lockdep files (lockdep_stats and lock_stat) are accessed as the lock hold time will be shorter for them. For consistency, they are also modified to iterate the lock_classes array directly. Signed-off-by: Waiman Long Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220211035526.1329503-2-longman@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

locking/lockdep: Avoid potential access of invalid memory in lock_class

2022-04-08T12:39:48Z

commit 61cc4534b6550997c97a03759ab46b29d44c0017 upstream. It was found that reading /proc/lockdep after a lockdep splat may potentially cause an access to freed memory if lockdep_unregister_key() is called after the splat but before access to /proc/lockdep [1]. This is due to the fact that graph_lock() call in lockdep_unregister_key() fails after the clearing of debug_locks by the splat process. After lockdep_unregister_key() is called, the lock_name may be freed but the corresponding lock_class structure still have a reference to it. That invalid memory pointer will then be accessed when /proc/lockdep is read by a user and a use-after-free (UAF) error will be reported if KASAN is enabled. To fix this problem, lockdep_unregister_key() is now modified to always search for a matching key irrespective of the debug_locks state and zap the corresponding lock class if a matching one is found. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/77f05c15-81b6-bddd-9650-80d5f23fe330@i-love.sakura.ne.jp/ Fixes: 8b39adbee805 ("locking/lockdep: Make lockdep_unregister_key() honor 'debug_locks' again") Reported-by: Tetsuo Handa Signed-off-by: Waiman Long Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche Cc: Cheng-Jui Wang Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220103023558.1377055-1-longman@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

lockdep: Correct lock_classes index mapping

2022-02-23T11:01:08Z

commit 28df029d53a2fd80c1b8674d47895648ad26dcfb upstream. A kernel exception was hit when trying to dump /proc/lockdep_chains after lockdep report "BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low!": Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 00054005450e05c3 ... 00054005450e05c3] address between user and kernel address ranges ... pc : [0xffffffece769b3a8] string+0x50/0x10c lr : [0xffffffece769ac88] vsnprintf+0x468/0x69c ... Call trace: string+0x50/0x10c vsnprintf+0x468/0x69c seq_printf+0x8c/0xd8 print_name+0x64/0xf4 lc_show+0xb8/0x128 seq_read_iter+0x3cc/0x5fc proc_reg_read_iter+0xdc/0x1d4 The cause of the problem is the function lock_chain_get_class() will shift lock_classes index by 1, but the index don't need to be shifted anymore since commit 01bb6f0af992 ("locking/lockdep: Change the range of class_idx in held_lock struct") already change the index to start from 0. The lock_classes[-1] located at chain_hlocks array. When printing lock_classes[-1] after the chain_hlocks entries are modified, the exception happened. The output of lockdep_chains are incorrect due to this problem too. Fixes: f611e8cf98ec ("lockdep: Take read/write status in consideration when generate chainkey") Signed-off-by: Cheng Jui Wang Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Boqun Feng Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220210105011.21712-1-cheng-jui.wang@mediatek.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

kernel: delete repeated words in comments

2022-02-01T16:25:45Z

[ Upstream commit c034f48e99907d5be147ac8f0f3e630a9307c2be ] Drop repeated words in kernel/events/. {if, the, that, with, time} Drop repeated words in kernel/locking/. {it, no, the} Drop repeated words in kernel/sched/. {in, not} Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210127023412.26292-1-rdunlap@infradead.org Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap Acked-by: Will Deacon [kernel/locking/] Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Will Deacon Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Juri Lelli Cc: Vincent Guittot Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

lockdep: Let lock_is_held_type() detect recursive read as read

2021-11-18T13:04:02Z

[ Upstream commit 2507003a1d10917c9158077bf6030719d02c941e ] lock_is_held_type(, 1) detects acquired read locks. It only recognized locks acquired with lock_acquire_shared(). Read locks acquired with lock_acquire_shared_recursive() are not recognized because a `2' is stored as the read value. Rework the check to additionally recognise lock's read value one and two as a read held lock. Fixes: e918188611f07 ("locking: More accurate annotations for read_lock()") Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Acked-by: Boqun Feng Acked-by: Waiman Long Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210903084001.lblecrvz4esl4mrr@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

locking/lockdep: Avoid RCU-induced noinstr fail

2021-11-18T13:03:53Z

[ Upstream commit ce0b9c805dd66d5e49fd53ec5415ae398f4c56e6 ] vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: look_up_lock_class()+0xc7: call to rcu_read_lock_any_held() leaves .noinstr.text section Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210624095148.311980536@infradead.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

locking/lockdep: Mark local_lock_t

2021-09-15T07:50:41Z

[ Upstream commit dfd5e3f5fe27bda91d5cc028c86ffbb7a0614489 ] The local_lock_t's are special, because they cannot form IRQ inversions, make sure we can tell them apart from the rest of the locks. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

locking/mutex: Fix HANDOFF condition

2021-09-15T07:50:23Z

[ Upstream commit 048661a1f963e9517630f080687d48af79ed784c ] Yanfei reported that setting HANDOFF should not depend on recomputing @first, only on @first state. Which would then give: if (ww_ctx || !first) first = __mutex_waiter_is_first(lock, &waiter); if (first) __mutex_set_flag(lock, MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF); But because 'ww_ctx || !first' is basically 'always' and the test for first is relatively cheap, omit that first branch entirely. Reported-by: Yanfei Xu Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Waiman Long Reviewed-by: Yanfei Xu Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210630154114.896786297@infradead.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin