From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75BDDC18E5A for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:22:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 174FF2146E for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:22:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="bXtZeMLw" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 174FF2146E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A9CD96B0003; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:22:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A4D876B0006; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:22:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 93D2C6B0007; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:22:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0118.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.118]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C9EB6B0003 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:22:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin26.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F479824805A for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:22:19 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76581028398.26.egg34_4e6bc7f055136 X-HE-Tag: egg34_4e6bc7f055136 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 7429 Received: from mail-oi1-f195.google.com (mail-oi1-f195.google.com [209.85.167.195]) by imf45.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:22:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi1-f195.google.com with SMTP id i1so1324oie.8 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:22:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0SG9alWkJ/Jgp88pmVWrlnAeORjU1Bi5WlBRFbHa1ck=; b=bXtZeMLwoJSnRz7jYAT9Nxgt4EjIpibQndWXUYf0e25pPrU5HPPn1B9ylL4DXV6Z1j qeFDlH1hFWzJQ70cTl0cuy/Fbm/L0h0EWDQjgHIniSeYfa1Uk+XmSZLW1QgEJFMKAzjF VZiHdDIDdWe5BnM+5Noagr/GdY5lI37UwcLgkyMdVfsD/fe+MFTuOxrTeJi1nX4i8HOg VUkKfaAU3TrdPfbXYQqboyCHbc0eyYBaRmxuH52Xn5Dh/TCm1e02ASC5dirfvTF1YxPx lzPE++XTCgEvyiX6oaF3wYDbxIDXkcGIqFCjOGk8cU/ivzDnxBuuRsxii0nf2rzn+eB4 pQZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0SG9alWkJ/Jgp88pmVWrlnAeORjU1Bi5WlBRFbHa1ck=; b=qNEGWax65+bI2nEca1Lw6z0wqkhZ3QuYVAKsXDUPszVZNnbnGj0USw1sR8o68Ihi+8 vpMe5HmojdEnUmOjaVh/OQRX9crDrAjhqZwRZjSDvY5Ck/eMx1r/FZOng1uAFxOVN+7D hWwx+Mf5kEn8gMUIR/rHmMzgI/k67vlmUPSZeTzFyNhgBMeOC6g7jyj2yeXqRY0ST/e+ 4o3iI2AASRs7RfO+s/gH1dXkIhbvq/R4PZx1yNgUKNuFsr23FiRltTcVAEGujDeosaZc 2/PDWrv351Ym3DTO1qUF8hrGnPJKnUh3E6IVn/V0qzgxuwd41EHBb8hN2dtUbcpQaL+6 YT1w== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1VUwvyvh7vk4P4/+SivOzFrRIPtID7u1BC2mtm9uVk4atfggNh f32kQL5VKOxl8CHU5/P1dCgm5AQIUaR6TLx4Va8UAg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuSiveurHJ3mWgzsiX28P2uFv4kQvFy5FChN7qEoSlaBMM2vSEC6fMHVo5v9rjlRZlpO64Dbc+u19jr17edDf0= X-Received: by 2002:aca:1913:: with SMTP id l19mr51096oii.47.1583882536478; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:22:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87k142lpfz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <875zfmloir.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87v9nmjulm.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <202003021531.C77EF10@keescook> <20200303085802.eqn6jbhwxtmz4j2x@wittgenstein> <87v9nlii0b.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87a74xi4kz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87r1y8dqqz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87tv32cxmf.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87v9ne5y4y.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87zhcq4jdj.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87wo7roq2c.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> In-Reply-To: <87wo7roq2c.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> From: Jann Horn Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:21:49 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] exec: Add a exec_update_mutex to replace cred_guard_mutex To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Bernd Edlinger , Christian Brauner , Kees Cook , Jonathan Corbet , Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton , Alexey Dobriyan , Thomas Gleixner , Oleg Nesterov , Frederic Weisbecker , Andrei Vagin , Ingo Molnar , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Yuyang Du , David Hildenbrand , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Anshuman Khandual , David Howells , James Morris , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Shakeel Butt , Jason Gunthorpe , Christian Kellner , Andrea Arcangeli , Aleksa Sarai , "Dmitry V. Levin" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-api@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:33 PM Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Jann Horn writes: > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 10:41 PM Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> The cred_guard_mutex is problematic. The cred_guard_mutex is held > >> over the userspace accesses as the arguments from userspace are read. > >> The cred_guard_mutex is held of PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT as the the other > >> threads are killed. The cred_guard_mutex is held over > >> "put_user(0, tsk->clear_child_tid)" in exit_mm(). > >> > >> Any of those can result in deadlock, as the cred_guard_mutex is held > >> over a possible indefinite userspace waits for userspace. > >> > >> Add exec_update_mutex that is only held over exec updating process > >> with the new contents of exec, so that code that needs not to be > >> confused by exec changing the mm and the cred in ways that can not > >> happen during ordinary execution of a process. > >> > >> The plan is to switch the users of cred_guard_mutex to > >> exec_udpate_mutex one by one. This lets us move forward while still > >> being careful and not introducing any regressions. > > [...] > >> @@ -1034,6 +1035,11 @@ static int exec_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm) > >> return -EINTR; > >> } > >> } > >> + > >> + ret = mutex_lock_killable(&tsk->signal->exec_update_mutex); > >> + if (ret) > >> + return ret; > > > > We're already holding the old mmap_sem, and now nest the > > exec_update_mutex inside it; but then while still holding the > > exec_update_mutex, we do mmput(), which can e.g. end up in ksm_exit(), > > which can do down_write(&mm->mmap_sem) from __ksm_exit(). So I think > > at least lockdep will be unhappy, and I'm not sure whether it's an > > actual problem or not. > > Good point. I should double check the lock ordering here with mmap_sem. > It doesn't look like mmput takes mmap_sem You sure about that? mmput() -> __mmput() -> ksm_exit() -> __ksm_exit() -> down_write(&mm->mmap_sem) Or also: mmput() -> __mmput() -> khugepaged_exit() -> __khugepaged_exit() -> down_write(&mm->mmap_sem) Or is there a reason why those paths can't happen?