From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: elver@google.com
Cc: paulmck@kernel.org, andreyknvl@google.com, glider@google.com,
dvyukov@google.com, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] kcsan: Fix misreporting if concurrent races on same address
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:02:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200211100243.101187-1-elver@google.com> (raw)
If there are at least 4 threads racing on the same address, it can
happen that one of the readers may observe another matching reader in
other_info. To avoid locking up, we have to consume 'other_info'
regardless, but skip the report. See the added comment for more details.
Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
---
v2:
* Improve comment to illustrate more concrete case.
---
kernel/kcsan/report.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/kcsan/report.c b/kernel/kcsan/report.c
index 3bc590e6be7e3..abf6852dff72f 100644
--- a/kernel/kcsan/report.c
+++ b/kernel/kcsan/report.c
@@ -422,6 +422,44 @@ static bool prepare_report(unsigned long *flags, const volatile void *ptr,
return false;
}
+ access_type |= other_info.access_type;
+ if ((access_type & KCSAN_ACCESS_WRITE) == 0) {
+ /*
+ * While the address matches, this is not the other_info
+ * from the thread that consumed our watchpoint, since
+ * neither this nor the access in other_info is a write.
+ * It is invalid to continue with the report, since we
+ * only have information about reads.
+ *
+ * This can happen due to concurrent races on the same
+ * address, with at least 4 threads. To avoid locking up
+ * other_info and all other threads, we have to consume
+ * it regardless.
+ *
+ * A concrete case to illustrate why we might lock up if
+ * we do not consume other_info:
+ *
+ * We have 4 threads, all accessing the same address
+ * (or matching address ranges). Assume the following
+ * watcher and watchpoint consumer pairs:
+ * write1-read1, read2-write2. The first to populate
+ * other_info is write2, however, write1 consumes it,
+ * resulting in a report of write1-write2. This report
+ * is valid, however, now read1 populates other_info;
+ * read2-read1 is an invalid conflict, yet, no other
+ * conflicting access is left. Therefore, we must
+ * consume read1's other_info.
+ *
+ * Since this case is assumed to be rare, it is
+ * reasonable to omit this report: one of the other
+ * reports includes information about the same shared
+ * data, and at this point the likelihood that we
+ * re-report the same race again is high.
+ */
+ release_report(flags, KCSAN_REPORT_RACE_SIGNAL);
+ return false;
+ }
+
/*
* Matching & usable access in other_info: keep other_info_lock
* locked, as this thread consumes it to print the full report;
--
2.25.0.225.g125e21ebc7-goog
reply other threads:[~2020-02-11 10:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20200211100243.101187-1-elver@google.com \
--to=elver@google.com \
--cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
/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).