linux-kernel - Re: kmemcheck caught read from freed memory (cfq_free_io

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:13:42 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: kmemcheck caught read from freed memory (cfq_free_io_context)

On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 13:53 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:

> > Yeah, SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU should have a _HUGE_ comment explaining it,
> > I'm sure this is not the first (nor the last) time people get that
> > wrong.
> 
> It should, SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU is definitely useful, but it is expected
> to be an 'easier' way of doing the call_rcu() manually. So it definitely
> needs more documentation.
> 

Ok I gave it a go, how bad is this text?

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
---
diff --git a/include/linux/slab.h b/include/linux/slab.h
index f950a89..e049ddc 100644
--- a/include/linux/slab.h
+++ b/include/linux/slab.h
@@ -25,6 +25,32 @@
 #define SLAB_CACHE_DMA		0x00004000UL	/* Use GFP_DMA memory */
 #define SLAB_STORE_USER		0x00010000UL	/* DEBUG: Store the last owner for bug hunting */
 #define SLAB_PANIC		0x00040000UL	/* Panic if kmem_cache_create() fails */
+/*
+ * SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU - **WARNING** READ THIS!
+ *
+ * This delays freeing the SLAB page by a grace period, it does _NOT_
+ * delay object freeing. This means that if you do kmem_cache_free()
+ * that memory location is free to be reused at any time. Thus it may
+ * be possible to see another object there in the same RCU grace period.
+ *
+ * This feature only ensures the memory location backing the object
+ * stays valid, the trick to using this is relying on an independent
+ * object validation pass. Something like:
+ *
+ *  rcu_read_lock()
+ * again:
+ *  obj = lockless_lookup(key);
+ *  if (obj) {
+ *    if (!try_get_ref(obj)) // might fail for free objects
+ *      goto again;
+ *
+ *    if (obj->key != key) { // not the object we expected
+ *      put_ref(obj);
+ *      goto again;
+ *    }
+ *  }
+ *  rcu_read_unlock();
+ */
 #define SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU	0x00080000UL	/* Defer freeing slabs to RCU */
 #define SLAB_MEM_SPREAD		0x00100000UL	/* Spread some memory over cpuset */
 #define SLAB_TRACE		0x00200000UL	/* Trace allocations and frees */


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/