Commit 4aab3b5b authored by Tejun Heo's avatar Tejun Heo

percpu-ref: fix DEAD flag contamination of percpu pointer

While decoupling ATOMIC and DEAD flags, f47ad457 ("percpu_ref:
decouple switching to percpu mode and reinit") updated
__ref_is_percpu() so that it only tests ATOMIC flag to determine
whether the ref is in percpu mode or not; however, while DEAD implies
ATOMIC, the two flags are set separately during percpu_ref_kill() and
if __ref_is_percpu() races percpu_ref_kill(), it may see DEAD w/o
ATOMIC.  Because __ref_is_percpu() returns @ref->percpu_count_ptr
value verbatim as the percpu pointer after testing ATOMIC, the pointer
may now be contaminated with the DEAD flag.

This can be fixed by clearing the flag bits before returning the
pointer which was the fix proposed by Shaohua; however, as DEAD
implies ATOMIC, we can just test for both flags at once and avoid the
explicit masking.

Update __ref_is_percpu() so that it tests that both ATOMIC and DEAD
are clear before returning @ref->percpu_count_ptr as the percpu
Signed-off-by: default avatarTejun Heo <>
Reported-and-Reviewed-by: default avatarShaohua Li <>
Fixes: f47ad457 ("percpu_ref: decouple switching to percpu mode and reinit")
parent cac7f242
......@@ -133,7 +133,13 @@ static inline bool __ref_is_percpu(struct percpu_ref *ref,
/* paired with smp_store_release() in percpu_ref_reinit() */
if (unlikely(percpu_ptr & __PERCPU_REF_ATOMIC))
* Theoretically, the following could test just ATOMIC; however,
* then we'd have to mask off DEAD separately as DEAD may be
* visible without ATOMIC if we race with percpu_ref_kill(). DEAD
* implies ATOMIC anyway. Test them together.
if (unlikely(percpu_ptr & __PERCPU_REF_ATOMIC_DEAD))
return false;
*percpu_countp = (unsigned long __percpu *)percpu_ptr;
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment