From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: perf: use-after-free in perf_release
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:05:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170316120532.oo3lbz5nphziffnj@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170315164302.GA17317@redhat.com>
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 05:43:02PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/14, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> > @@ -10346,6 +10346,17 @@ void perf_event_free_task(struct task_struct *task)
> > continue;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&ctx->mutex);
> > + raw_spin_lock_irq(&ctx->lock);
> > + /*
> > + * Destroy the task <-> ctx relation and mark the context dead.
> > + *
> > + * This is important because even though the task hasn't been
> > + * exposed yet the context has been (through child_list).
> > + */
> > + RCU_INIT_POINTER(task->perf_event_ctxp[ctxn], NULL);
> > + WRITE_ONCE(ctx->task, TASK_TOMBSTONE);
> > + put_task_struct(task); /* cannot be last */
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->lock);
>
> Agreed, this is what I had in mind. Although you know, I spent 3
> hours looking at your patch and I still can't convince myself I am
> really sure it closes all races ;)
Ha; yes I know that feeling. I used to have a few sheets of paper filled
with diagrams. Sadly I could not find them again. Must've been over
eager cleaning my desk at some point.
>
> OK, I believe this is correct. And iiuc both RCU_INIT_POINTER(NULL)
> and put_task_struct() are not strictly necessary? At least until we
> add WARN_ON(tsk->usage != 2) before free_task() in copy process().
Right; I just kept the code similar to the other location. I even
considered making a helper function to not duplicate, but in the end
decided against it.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is off-topic, but to me list_for_each_entry(event->child_list)
> in perf_event_release_kernel() looks very confusing and misleading.
> And list_first_entry_or_null(), we do not really need NULL if list
> is empty, tmp == child should be F even if we use list_first_entry().
> And given that we already have list_is_last(), it would be nice to
> add list_is_first() and cleanup perf_event_release_kernel() a bit:
>
Agreed; its a bit of a weird one.
Let me go write proper patches for the things we have so far though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-16 12:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-06 9:57 perf: use-after-free in perf_release Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-06 12:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-06 12:17 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-06 12:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-06 12:27 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-06 12:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-06 13:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-06 13:34 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-07 9:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 9:26 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-07 9:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 9:43 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-07 10:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 13:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 13:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 14:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-07 14:17 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-07 16:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-07 17:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 12:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 13:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-14 13:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 14:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-14 14:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 14:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-14 15:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 15:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 15:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-14 15:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 15:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-14 15:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 15:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-15 16:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-16 12:05 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-03-16 13:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 16:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-03-16 12:47 [PATCH 0/4] perf patches Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 12:47 ` [PATCH 1/4] perf: Fix use-after-free in perf_release() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 15:19 ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf/core: " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 12:47 ` [PATCH 2/4] perf: Fix event inheritance on fork() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 15:19 ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf/core: " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 12:47 ` [PATCH 3/4] perf: Simplify perf_event_free_task() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 15:20 ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf/core: " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 12:47 ` [PATCH 4/4] perf: Better explain the inherit magic Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 15:21 ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf/core: " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-16 13:20 ` [PATCH 0/4] perf patches Ingo Molnar
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=20170316120532.oo3lbz5nphziffnj@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.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 NNTP newsgroup(s).