4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Tony Camuso <tcamuso@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit cdea46566bb21ce309725a024208322a409055cc upstream.
A vendor with a system having more than 128 CPUs occasionally encounters
the following crash during shutdown. This is not an easily reproduceable
event, but the vendor was able to provide the following analysis of the
crash, which exhibits the same footprint each time.
crash> bt
PID: 0 TASK: ffff88017c70ce70 CPU: 5 COMMAND: "swapper/5"
#0 [ffff88085c143ac8] machine_kexec at ffffffff81059c8b
#1 [ffff88085c143b28] __crash_kexec at ffffffff811052e2
#2 [ffff88085c143bf8] crash_kexec at ffffffff811053d0
#3 [ffff88085c143c10] oops_end at ffffffff8168ef88
#4 [ffff88085c143c38] no_context at ffffffff8167ebb3
#5 [ffff88085c143c88] __bad_area_nosemaphore at ffffffff8167ec49
#6 [ffff88085c143cd0] bad_area_nosemaphore at ffffffff8167edb3
#7 [ffff88085c143ce0] __do_page_fault at ffffffff81691d1e
#8 [ffff88085c143d40] do_page_fault at ffffffff81691ec5
#9 [ffff88085c143d70] page_fault at ffffffff8168e188
[exception RIP: unknown or invalid address]
RIP: ffffffffa053c800 RSP: ffff88085c143e28 RFLAGS: 00010206
RAX: ffff88017c72bfd8 RBX: ffff88017a8dc000 RCX: ffff8810588b5ac8
RDX: ffff8810588b5a00 RSI: ffffffffa053c800 RDI: ffff8810588b5a00
RBP: ffff88085c143e58 R8: ffff88017c70d408 R9: ffff88017a8dc000
R10: 0000000000000002 R11: ffff88085c143da0 R12: ffff8810588b5ac8
R13: 0000000000000100 R14: ffffffffa053c800 R15: ffff8810588b5a00
ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018
<IRQ stack>
[exception RIP: cpuidle_enter_state+82]
RIP: ffffffff81514192 RSP: ffff88017c72be50 RFLAGS: 00000202
RAX: 0000001e4c3c6f16 RBX: 000000000000f8a0 RCX: 0000000000000018
RDX: 0000000225c17d03 RSI: ffff88017c72bfd8 RDI: 0000001e4c3c6f16
RBP: ffff88017c72be78 R8: 000000000000237e R9: 0000000000000018
R10: 0000000000002494 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: ffff88017c72be20
R13: ffff88085c14f8e0 R14: 0000000000000082 R15: 0000001e4c3bb400
ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffff10 CS: 0010 SS: 0018
This is the corresponding stack trace
It has crashed because the area pointed with RIP extracted from timer
element is already removed during a shutdown process.
The function is smi_timeout().
And we think ffff8810588b5a00 in RDX is a parameter struct smi_info
crash> rd ffff8810588b5a00 20
ffff8810588b5a00: ffff8810588b6000 0000000000000000 .`.X............
ffff8810588b5a10: ffff880853264400 ffffffffa05417e0 .D&S......T.....
ffff8810588b5a20: 24a024a000000000 0000000000000000 .....$.$........
ffff8810588b5a30: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ................
ffff8810588b5a30: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ................
ffff8810588b5a40: ffffffffa053a040 ffffffffa053a060 @.S.....`.S.....
ffff8810588b5a50: 0000000000000000 0000000100000001 ................
ffff8810588b5a60: 0000000000000000 0000000000000e00 ................
ffff8810588b5a70: ffffffffa053a580 ffffffffa053a6e0 ..S.......S.....
ffff8810588b5a80: ffffffffa053a4a0 ffffffffa053a250 ..S.....P.S.....
ffff8810588b5a90: 0000000500000002 0000000000000000 ................
Unfortunately the top of this area is already detroyed by someone.
But because of two reasonns we think this is struct smi_info
1) The address included in between ffff8810588b5a70 and ffff8810588b5a80:
are inside of ipmi_si_intf.c see crash> module ffff88085779d2c0
2) We've found the area which point this.
It is offset 0x68 of ffff880859df4000
crash> rd ffff880859df4000 100
ffff880859df4000: 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 ................
ffff880859df4010: ffffffffa0535290 dead000000000200 .RS.............
ffff880859df4020: ffff880859df4020 ffff880859df4020 @.Y.... @.Y....
ffff880859df4030: 0000000000000002 0000000000100010 ................
ffff880859df4040: ffff880859df4040 ffff880859df4040 @@.Y....@@.Y....
ffff880859df4050: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ................
ffff880859df4060: 0000000000000000 ffff8810588b5a00 .........Z.X....
ffff880859df4070: 0000000000000001 ffff880859df4078 ........x@.Y....
If we regards it as struct ipmi_smi in shutdown process
it looks consistent.
The remedy for this apparent race is affixed below.
Signed-off-by: Tony Camuso <tcamuso@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
This was first introduced in 7ea0ed2b5be817 ipmi: Make the
message handler easier to use for SMI interfaces
where some code was moved outside of the rcu_read_lock()
and the lock was not added.
Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
--- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
+++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
@@ -3877,6 +3877,9 @@ static void smi_recv_tasklet(unsigned lo
* because the lower layer is allowed to hold locks while calling
* message delivery.
*/
+
+ rcu_read_lock();
+
if (!run_to_completion)
spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
if (intf->curr_msg == NULL && !intf->in_shutdown) {
@@ -3899,6 +3902,8 @@ static void smi_recv_tasklet(unsigned lo
if (newmsg)
intf->handlers->sender(intf->send_info, newmsg);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+
handle_new_recv_msgs(intf);
}