From: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
To: Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
James Morris <jamorris@linux.microsoft.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cred: Use RCU primitives to access RCU pointers
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 15:14:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAG48ez2Yc-J1gV4=sTMizySmeFkiZGU+j1NTnZaqyPPo1mYQ=Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200129065738.GA17486@workstation-portable>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 7:57 AM Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 08:09:17PM +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:04 PM Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 10:30:19AM +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 8:28 AM Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > task_struct.cred and task_struct.real_cred are annotated by __rcu,
> > > >
> > > > task_struct.cred doesn't actually have RCU semantics though, see
> > > > commit d7852fbd0f0423937fa287a598bfde188bb68c22. For task_struct.cred,
> > > > it would probably be more correct to remove the __rcu annotation?
> > >
> > > Hi Jann,
> > >
> > > I went through the commit you mentioned. If I understand it correctly,
> > > ->cred was not being accessed concurrently (via RCU), hence, a non_rcu
> > > flag was introduced, which determined if the clean-up should wait for
> > > RCU grace-periods or not. And since, the changes were 'thread local'
> > > there was no need to wait for an entire RCU GP to elapse.
> >
> > Yeah.
> >
> > > The commit too, as you said, mentions the removal of __rcu annotation.
> > > However, simply removing the annotation won't work, as there are quite a
> > > few instances where RCU primitives are used. Even get_current_cred()
> > > uses RCU APIs to get a reference to ->cred.
> >
> > Luckily, there aren't too many places that directly access ->cred,
> > since luckily there are helper functions like get_current_cred() that
> > will do it for you. Grepping through the kernel, I see:
[...]
> > So actually, the number of places that already don't use RCU accessors
> > is much higher than the number of places that use them.
> >
> > > So, currently, maybe we
> > > should continue to use RCU APIs and leave the __rcu annotation in?
> > > (Until someone who takes it on himself to remove __rcu annotation and
> > > fix all the instances). Does that sound good? Or do you want me to
> > > remove __rcu annotation and get the process started?
> >
> > I don't think it's a good idea to add more uses of RCU APIs for
> > ->cred; you shouldn't "fix" warnings by making the code more wrong.
> >
> > If you want to fix this, I think it would be relatively easy to fix
> > this properly - as far as I can tell, there are only seven places that
> > you'll have to change, although you may have to split it up into three
> > patches.
>
> Thank you for the detailed analysis. I'll try my best and send you a
> patch.
While you can CC me on that, I'm not a kernel maintainer; you should
send patches to the people who maintain the areas of kernel code that
you're modifying. (kernel/cred.c has no specific maintainer; for that
file, I'd probably try sending patches to Andrew Morton, Oleg
Nesterov, David Howells and Eric Biederman, as well as the
linux-kernel@ mailinglist.)
> But before I start I want to make sure one thing. The changes
> done by the commit you mentioned (which introduced non_rcu flag), should
> be now reverted, right?
No.
> Since, prior to the commit RCU semantics were
> there and RCU was being used (which was unnecessary) and the fix merely,
> removed these (unnecessary) RCU usages (with checks to either use them
> or not, but now we actually don't use RCU for subjective credentials).
>
> So, now what's left is the unused RCU code (which needs to be removed)
> and the changes done in the temporary fix (which would be reverted since
> we don't want to use RCU).
No. Instances of `struct cred` *can* still have an RCU-protected
lifetime; but only certain references to it have RCU semantics.
{task}->cred doesn't have RCU semantics, but {task}->real_cred does
have RCU semantics, and those two can point to the same object.
__rcu annotations mark that a *reference* has RCU semantics. Lack of
__rcu annotation means that the *reference* does not have RCU
semantics, but the object it points to can still have a RCU-protected
lifetime.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-29 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-28 7:27 [PATCH] cred: Use RCU primitives to access RCU pointers Amol Grover
2020-01-28 9:30 ` Jann Horn
2020-01-28 11:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-01-28 12:19 ` Jann Horn
2020-01-28 12:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-01-28 17:04 ` Amol Grover
2020-01-28 19:09 ` Jann Horn
2020-01-29 6:57 ` Amol Grover
2020-01-29 14:14 ` Jann Horn [this message]
2020-02-06 1:32 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-06 11:28 ` Jann Horn
2020-02-06 16:49 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-06 17:15 ` Jann Horn
2020-02-06 18:08 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-06 13:09 ` Amol Grover
2020-01-28 15:00 ` David Howells
2020-01-31 17:49 ` David Howells
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='CAG48ez2Yc-J1gV4=sTMizySmeFkiZGU+j1NTnZaqyPPo1mYQ=Q@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jannh@google.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=frextrite@gmail.com \
--cc=jamorris@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 NNTP newsgroup(s).