From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
RCU <rcu@vger.kernel.org>,
Neeraj upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@sony.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Do not release a wait-head from a GP kthread
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 08:13:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7d754498-b22e-456c-a58a-c39d6bdba025@joelfernandes.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zem5pkNiAy-EZdo9@pc636>
On 3/7/2024 7:57 AM, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 05:31:31PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/5/2024 2:57 PM, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
>>> Fix a below race by not releasing a wait-head from the
>>> GP-kthread as it can lead for reusing it whereas a worker
>>> can still access it thus execute newly added callbacks too
>>> early.
>>>
>>> CPU 0 CPU 1
>>> ----- -----
>>>
>>> // wait_tail == HEAD1
>>> rcu_sr_normal_gp_cleanup() {
>>> // has passed SR_MAX_USERS_WAKE_FROM_GP
>>> wait_tail->next = next;
>>> // done_tail = HEAD1
>>> smp_store_release(&rcu_state.srs_done_tail, wait_tail);
>>> queue_work() {
>>> test_and_set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, work_data_bits(work)
>>> __queue_work()
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> set_work_pool_and_clear_pending()
>>> rcu_sr_normal_gp_cleanup_work() {
[..]
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
>>> Fixes: 05a10b921000 ("rcu: Support direct wake-up of synchronize_rcu() users")
>>> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 22 ++++++++--------------
>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
>>> index 31f3a61f9c38..475647620b12 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
>>> @@ -1656,21 +1656,11 @@ static void rcu_sr_normal_gp_cleanup(void)
>>> WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_sr_is_wait_head(wait_tail));
>>>
>>> /*
>>> - * Process (a) and (d) cases. See an illustration. Apart of
>>> - * that it handles the scenario when all clients are done,
>>> - * wait-head is released if last. The worker is not kicked.
>>> + * Process (a) and (d) cases. See an illustration.
>>> */
>>> llist_for_each_safe(rcu, next, wait_tail->next) {
>>> - if (rcu_sr_is_wait_head(rcu)) {
>>> - if (!rcu->next) {
>>> - rcu_sr_put_wait_head(rcu);
>>> - wait_tail->next = NULL;
>>> - } else {
>>> - wait_tail->next = rcu;
>>> - }
>>> -
>>> + if (rcu_sr_is_wait_head(rcu))
>>> break;
>>> - }
>>>
>>> rcu_sr_normal_complete(rcu);
>>> // It can be last, update a next on this step.
>>> @@ -1684,8 +1674,12 @@ static void rcu_sr_normal_gp_cleanup(void)
>>> smp_store_release(&rcu_state.srs_done_tail, wait_tail);
>>> ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER(rcu_state.srs_done_tail);
>>>
>>> - if (wait_tail->next)
>>> - queue_work(system_highpri_wq, &rcu_state.srs_cleanup_work);
>>> + /*
>>> + * We schedule a work in order to perform a final processing
>>> + * of outstanding users(if still left) and releasing wait-heads
>>> + * added by rcu_sr_normal_gp_init() call.
>>> + */
>>> + queue_work(system_highpri_wq, &rcu_state.srs_cleanup_work);
>>> }
>>
>> Ah, nice. So instead of allocating/freeing in GP thread and freeing in worker,
>> you allocate heads only in GP thread and free them only in worker, thus
>> essentially fixing the UAF that Frederick found.
>>
>> AFAICS, this fixes the issue.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
>>
> Thank you for the review-by!
>
>> There might a way to prevent queuing new work as fast-path optimization, incase
>> the CBs per GP will always be < SR_MAX_USERS_WAKE_FROM_GP but I could not find a
>> workqueue API that helps there, and work_busy() has comments saying not to use that.
>>
> This is not really critical but yes, we can think of it.
>
Thanks, I have a patch that does that. I could not help but write it as soon as
I woke up in the morning, ;-). It passes torture and I will push it for further
review after some more testing.
thanks,
- Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-07 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-05 19:57 [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Do not release a wait-head from a GP kthread Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2024-03-05 19:57 ` [PATCH 2/2] rcu: Allocate WQ with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM bit set Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2024-03-06 2:15 ` Z qiang
2024-03-06 11:56 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-03-06 17:57 ` Joel Fernandes
2024-03-07 12:16 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-03-06 22:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Do not release a wait-head from a GP kthread Joel Fernandes
2024-03-06 22:44 ` Joel Fernandes
2024-03-07 12:25 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-03-07 6:21 ` Joel Fernandes
2024-03-07 7:09 ` Joel Fernandes
2024-03-07 12:31 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-03-07 12:28 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-03-07 12:57 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-03-07 13:13 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2024-03-07 0:04 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-03-07 12:17 ` Uladzislau Rezki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7d754498-b22e-456c-a58a-c39d6bdba025@joelfernandes.org \
--to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleksiy.avramchenko@sony.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).