All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@yandex.ru>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Use of probe_kernel_address() in task_rcu_dereference() without checking return value
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 18:20:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190902162036.GS2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190902144424.GB14770@redhat.com>

On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 04:44:24PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> speaking of the users of task_rcu_dereference(), membarrier_global_expedited()
> does
> 
> 		rcu_read_lock();
> 		p = task_rcu_dereference(&cpu_rq(cpu)->curr);
> 		if (p && p->mm && (atomic_read(&p->mm->membarrier_state) &
> 				   MEMBARRIER_STATE_GLOBAL_EXPEDITED)) {
> 
> This asks for READ_ONCE, but this is minor. Why can't p->mm be freed?
> 
> I guess it is fine to read the garbage from &p->mm->membarrier_state if we race
> with the exiting task, but in theory this looks unsafe if CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC.
> 
> Another possible user of probe_slab_address() or I am totally confused?

You're quite right; that's busted.

Due to the lack of READ_ONCE() on p->mm, the above can in fact turn into
a NULL deref when we hit do_exit() around exit_mm(). The first p->mm
read is before and sees !NULL, the second is after and does observe
NULL, and *bang*.

I suppose it wants to be something like:

	mm = READ_ONCE(p->mm);
	if (mm && probe_address())

(I'm not sure _slab_ is a useful part of the name; it should work on
kernel memory irrespective of the allocator)

If it got freed, that CPU already just did something that implies
smp_mb() so we're good. So whatever garbage gets read, is fine. Either
we do a superfluous IPI or not is immaterial.



  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-02 16:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-30 14:08 [BUG] Use of probe_kernel_address() in task_rcu_dereference() without checking return value Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-08-30 15:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-08-30 15:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-08-30 15:40   ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-08-30 15:43     ` Linus Torvalds
2019-08-30 15:41   ` Linus Torvalds
2019-08-30 16:09     ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-08-30 16:21       ` Linus Torvalds
2019-08-30 16:44         ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-08-30 16:58           ` Linus Torvalds
2019-08-30 19:36         ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-02 13:40           ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-09-02 13:53             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-02 14:44               ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-09-02 16:20                 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-09-02 17:04             ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-02 17:34               ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-03  4:50                 ` [PATCH 0/3] task: Making tasks on the runqueue rcu protected Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-03  4:51                   ` [PATCH 1/3] task: Add a count of task rcu users Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-04 14:36                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-09-04 14:44                     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2019-09-04 15:32                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-09-04 16:33                         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2019-09-04 18:20                           ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-05 14:59                             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2019-09-03  4:52                   ` [PATCH 2/3] task: RCU protect tasks on the runqueue Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-03  7:41                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-03  7:47                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-03 16:44                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-03 17:08                           ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-03 18:13                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-03 19:18                               ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-03 20:06                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-03 21:32                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-05 20:02                                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-05 20:55                                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-06  7:07                                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-09 12:22                                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-25  7:36                                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-27  8:10                                   ` [tip: sched/urgent] tasks, sched/core: RCUify the assignment of rq->curr tip-bot2 for Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-03 19:42                               ` [PATCH 2/3] task: RCU protect tasks on the runqueue Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-14 12:31                           ` [PATCH v2 1/4] task: Add a count of task rcu users Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-14 12:31                           ` [PATCH v2 2/4] task: Ensure tasks are available for a grace period after leaving the runqueue Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-14 12:32                           ` [PATCH v2 3/4] task: With a grace period after finish_task_switch, remove unnecessary code Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-04 14:22                     ` [PATCH 2/3] task: RCU protect tasks on the runqueue Frederic Weisbecker
2019-09-03  4:52                   ` [PATCH 3/3] task: Clean house now that tasks on the runqueue are rcu protected Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-03  9:45                     ` kbuild test robot
2019-09-03 13:06                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-09-03 13:58                   ` [PATCH 0/3] task: Making tasks on the runqueue " Oleg Nesterov
2019-09-03 15:44                   ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-03 19:46                     ` Peter Zijlstra
     [not found]                   ` <87muf7f4bf.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
2019-09-14 12:33                     ` [PATCH v2 1/4] task: Add a count of task rcu users Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-15 13:54                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-27  8:10                       ` [tip: sched/urgent] tasks: Add a count of task RCU users tip-bot2 for Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-14 12:33                     ` [PATCH v2 2/4] task: Ensure tasks are available for a grace period after leaving the runqueue Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-15 14:07                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-15 14:09                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-27  8:10                       ` [tip: sched/urgent] tasks, sched/core: " tip-bot2 for Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-14 12:34                     ` [PATCH v2 3/4] task: With a grace period after finish_task_switch, remove unnecessary code Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-15 14:32                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-15 17:07                         ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-15 18:47                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-27  8:10                       ` [tip: sched/urgent] tasks, sched/core: With a grace period after finish_task_switch(), " tip-bot2 for Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-14 12:35                     ` [PATCH v2 4/4] task: RCUify the assignment of rq->curr Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-15 14:41                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-15 17:59                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-15 18:25                           ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-15 18:48                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-09-20 23:02                       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2019-09-26  1:49                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-26 12:42                           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2019-09-14 17:43                     ` [PATCH v2 0/4] task: Making tasks on the runqueue rcu protected Linus Torvalds
2019-09-17 17:38                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-25  7:51                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-26  1:11                           ` Eric W. Biederman

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=20190902162036.GS2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=cmetcalf@ezchip.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tkhai@yandex.ru \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.