[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: req->body should be updated before req->state
On 3/3/20 1:40 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 03/03/2020 01:58, Dongli Zhang wrote: >> The req->body should be updated before req->state is updated and the >> order should be guaranteed by a barrier. >> >> Otherwise, read_reply() might return req->body = NULL. >> >> Below is sample callstack when the issue is reproduced on purpose by >> reordering the updates of req->body and req->state and adding delay in >> code between updates of req->state and req->body. >> >> [ 22.356105] general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI >> [ 22.361185] CPU: 2 PID: 52 Comm: xenwatch Not tainted 5.5.0xen+ #6 >> [ 22.366727] Hardware name: Xen HVM domU, BIOS ... >> [ 22.372245] RIP: 0010:_parse_integer_fixup_radix+0x6/0x60 >> ... ... >> [ 22.392163] RSP: 0018:ffffb2d64023fdf0 EFLAGS: 00010246 >> [ 22.395933] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 75746e7562755f6d RCX: >> 0000000000000000 >> [ 22.400871] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffb2d64023fdfc RDI: >> 75746e7562755f6d >> [ 22.405874] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 00000000000001e8 R09: >> 0000000000cdcdcd >> [ 22.410945] R10: ffffb2d6402ffe00 R11: ffff9d95395eaeb0 R12: >> ffff9d9535935000 >> [ 22.417613] R13: ffff9d9526d4a000 R14: ffff9d9526f4f340 R15: >> ffff9d9537654000 >> [ 22.423726] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff9d953bc80000(0000) >> knlGS:0000000000000000 >> [ 22.429898] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >> [ 22.434342] CR2: 000000c4206a9000 CR3: 00000001ea3fc002 CR4: >> 00000000001606e0 >> [ 22.439645] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: >> 0000000000000000 >> [ 22.444941] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: >> 0000000000000400 >> [ 22.450342] Call Trace: >> [ 22.452509] simple_strtoull+0x27/0x70 >> [ 22.455572] xenbus_transaction_start+0x31/0x50 >> [ 22.459104] netback_changed+0x76c/0xcc1 [xen_netfront] >> [ 22.463279] ? find_watch+0x40/0x40 >> [ 22.466156] xenwatch_thread+0xb4/0x150 >> [ 22.469309] ? wait_woken+0x80/0x80 >> [ 22.472198] kthread+0x10e/0x130 >> [ 22.474925] ? kthread_park+0x80/0x80 >> [ 22.477946] ret_from_fork+0x35/0x40 >> [ 22.480968] Modules linked in: xen_kbdfront xen_fbfront(+) xen_netfront >> xen_blkfront >> [ 22.486783] ---[ end trace a9222030a747c3f7 ]--- >> [ 22.490424] RIP: 0010:_parse_integer_fixup_radix+0x6/0x60 >> >> The "while" is changed to "do while" so that wait_event() is used as a >> barrier. > > The correct barrier for read_reply() should be virt_rmb(). While on x86, this > is > equivalent to barrier(), on Arm this will be a dmb(ish) to prevent the > processor > re-ordering memory access. > > Therefore the barrier in test_reply() (called by wait_event()) is not going to > be sufficient for Arm. Sorry that I just erroneously thought wait_event() would be used as read barrier. I would change barrier() to virt_rmb() for read_reply() in v2. Thank you very much! Dongli Zhang _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |