Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.5 04/35] bpf: Fix deadlock with rq_lock in bpf_send_signal()

From: Sasha Levin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 20:00:26 -0400

From: Yonghong Song <[email-masked]>

[ Upstream commit 1bc7896e9ef44fd77858b3ef0b8a6840be3a4494 ]

When experimenting with bpf_send_signal() helper in our production
environment (5.2 based), we experienced a deadlock in NMI mode:
   #5 [ffffc9002219f770] queued_spin_lock_slowpath at ffffffff8110be24
   #6 [ffffc9002219f770] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave at ffffffff81a43012
   #7 [ffffc9002219f780] try_to_wake_up at ffffffff810e7ecd
   #8 [ffffc9002219f7e0] signal_wake_up_state at ffffffff810c7b55
   #9 [ffffc9002219f7f0] __send_signal at ffffffff810c8602
  #10 [ffffc9002219f830] do_send_sig_info at ffffffff810ca31a
  #11 [ffffc9002219f868] bpf_send_signal at ffffffff8119d227
  #12 [ffffc9002219f988] bpf_overflow_handler at ffffffff811d4140
  #13 [ffffc9002219f9e0] __perf_event_overflow at ffffffff811d68cf
  #14 [ffffc9002219fa10] perf_swevent_overflow at ffffffff811d6a09
  #15 [ffffc9002219fa38] ___perf_sw_event at ffffffff811e0f47
  #16 [ffffc9002219fc30] __schedule at ffffffff81a3e04d
  #17 [ffffc9002219fc90] schedule at ffffffff81a3e219
  #18 [ffffc9002219fca0] futex_wait_queue_me at ffffffff8113d1b9
  #19 [ffffc9002219fcd8] futex_wait at ffffffff8113e529
  #20 [ffffc9002219fdf0] do_futex at ffffffff8113ffbc
  #21 [ffffc9002219fec0] __x64_sys_futex at ffffffff81140d1c
  #22 [ffffc9002219ff38] do_syscall_64 at ffffffff81002602
  #23 [ffffc9002219ff50] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe at ffffffff81c00068

The above call stack is actually very similar to an issue
reported by Commit eac9153f2b58 ("bpf/stackmap: Fix deadlock with
rq_lock in bpf_get_stack()") by Song Liu. The only difference is
bpf_send_signal() helper instead of bpf_get_stack() helper.

The above deadlock is triggered with a perf_sw_event.
Similar to Commit eac9153f2b58, the below almost identical reproducer
used tracepoint point sched/sched_switch so the issue can be easily caught.
  /* stress_test.c */
  #include <stdio.h>
  #include <stdlib.h>
  #include <sys/mman.h>
  #include <pthread.h>
  #include <sys/types.h>
  #include <sys/stat.h>
  #include <fcntl.h>

  #define THREAD_COUNT 1000
  char *filename;
  void *worker(void *p)
  {
        void *ptr;
        int fd;
        char *pptr;

        fd = open(filename, O_RDONLY);
        if (fd < 0)
                return NULL;
        while (1) {
                struct timespec ts = {0, 1000 + rand() % 2000};

                ptr = mmap(NULL, 4096 * 64, PROT_READ, MAP_PRIVATE, fd, 0);
                usleep(1);
                if (ptr == MAP_FAILED) {
                        printf("failed to mmap\n");
                        break;
                }
                munmap(ptr, 4096 * 64);
                usleep(1);
                pptr = malloc(1);
                usleep(1);
                pptr[0] = 1;
                usleep(1);
                free(pptr);
                usleep(1);
                nanosleep(&ts, NULL);
        }
        close(fd);
        return NULL;
  }

  int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  {
        void *ptr;
        int i;
        pthread_t threads[THREAD_COUNT];

        if (argc < 2)
                return 0;

        filename = argv[1];

        for (i = 0; i < THREAD_COUNT; i++) {
                if (pthread_create(threads + i, NULL, worker, NULL)) {
                        fprintf(stderr, "Error creating thread\n");
                        return 0;
                }
        }

        for (i = 0; i < THREAD_COUNT; i++)
                pthread_join(threads[i], NULL);
        return 0;
  }
and the following command:
  1. run `stress_test /bin/ls` in one windown
  2. hack bcc trace.py with the following change:
     --- a/tools/trace.py
     +++ b/tools/trace.py
     @@ -513,6 +513,7 @@ BPF_PERF_OUTPUT(%s);
              __data.tgid = __tgid;
              __data.pid = __pid;
              bpf_get_current_comm(&__data.comm, sizeof(__data.comm));
     +        bpf_send_signal(10);
      %s
      %s
              %s.perf_submit(%s, &__data, sizeof(__data));
  3. in a different window run
     ./trace.py -p $(pidof stress_test) t:sched:sched_switch

The deadlock can be reproduced in our production system.

Similar to Song's fix, the fix is to delay sending signal if
irqs is disabled to avoid deadlocks involving with rq_lock.
With this change, my above stress-test in our production system
won't cause deadlock any more.

I also implemented a scale-down version of reproducer in the
selftest (a subsequent commit). With latest bpf-next,
it complains for the following potential deadlock.
  [   32.832450] -> #1 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}:
  [   32.833100]        _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x80
  [   32.833696]        task_rq_lock+0x2c/0xa0
  [   32.834182]        task_sched_runtime+0x59/0xd0
  [   32.834721]        thread_group_cputime+0x250/0x270
  [   32.835304]        thread_group_cputime_adjusted+0x2e/0x70
  [   32.835959]        do_task_stat+0x8a7/0xb80
  [   32.836461]        proc_single_show+0x51/0xb0
  ...
  [   32.839512] -> #0 (&(&sighand->siglock)->rlock){....}:
  [   32.840275]        __lock_acquire+0x1358/0x1a20
  [   32.840826]        lock_acquire+0xc7/0x1d0
  [   32.841309]        _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x80
  [   32.841916]        __lock_task_sighand+0x79/0x160
  [   32.842465]        do_send_sig_info+0x35/0x90
  [   32.842977]        bpf_send_signal+0xa/0x10
  [   32.843464]        bpf_prog_bc13ed9e4d3163e3_send_signal_tp_sched+0x465/0x1000
  [   32.844301]        trace_call_bpf+0x115/0x270
  [   32.844809]        perf_trace_run_bpf_submit+0x4a/0xc0
  [   32.845411]        perf_trace_sched_switch+0x10f/0x180
  [   32.846014]        __schedule+0x45d/0x880
  [   32.846483]        schedule+0x5f/0xd0
  ...

  [   32.853148] Chain exists of:
  [   32.853148]   &(&sighand->siglock)->rlock --> &p->pi_lock --> &rq->lock
  [   32.853148]
  [   32.854451]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
  [   32.854451]
  [   32.855173]        CPU0                    CPU1
  [   32.855745]        ----                    ----
  [   32.856278]   lock(&rq->lock);
  [   32.856671]                                lock(&p->pi_lock);
  [   32.857332]                                lock(&rq->lock);
  [   32.857999]   lock(&(&sighand->siglock)->rlock);

  Deadlock happens on CPU0 when it tries to acquire &sighand->siglock
  but it has been held by CPU1 and CPU1 tries to grab &rq->lock
  and cannot get it.

  This is not exactly the callstack in our production environment,
  but sympotom is similar and both locks are using spin_lock_irqsave()
  to acquire the lock, and both involves rq_lock. The fix to delay
  sending signal when irq is disabled also fixed this issue.

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <[email-masked]>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email-masked]>
Cc: Song Liu <[email-masked]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email-masked]
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email-masked]>
---
 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
index e5ef4ae9edb50..0e553b1706d37 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -731,7 +731,7 @@ BPF_CALL_1(bpf_send_signal, u32, sig)
 	if (unlikely(!nmi_uaccess_okay()))
 		return -EPERM;
 
-	if (in_nmi()) {
+	if (irqs_disabled()) {
 		/* Do an early check on signal validity. Otherwise,
 		 * the error is lost in deferred irq_work.
 		 */
-- 
2.20.1