linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.18 049/150] blk-mq: Fix a race between bt_clear_tag() and bt

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:	Tue, 13 Jan 2015 23:22:00 -0800
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Robert Elliott <elliott@...com>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
Subject: [PATCH 3.18 049/150] blk-mq: Fix a race between bt_clear_tag() and bt_get()

3.18-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>

commit c38d185d4af12e8be63ca4b6745d99449c450f12 upstream.

What we need is the following two guarantees:
* Any thread that observes the effect of the test_and_set_bit() by
  __bt_get_word() also observes the preceding addition of 'current'
  to the appropriate wait list. This is guaranteed by the semantics
  of the spin_unlock() operation performed by prepare_and_wait().
  Hence the conversion of test_and_set_bit_lock() into
  test_and_set_bit().
* The wait lists are examined by bt_clear() after the tag bit has
  been cleared. clear_bit_unlock() guarantees that any thread that
  observes that the bit has been cleared also observes the store
  operations preceding clear_bit_unlock(). However,
  clear_bit_unlock() does not prevent that the wait lists are examined
  before that the tag bit is cleared. Hence the addition of a memory
  barrier between clear_bit() and the wait list examination.

Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@...com>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 block/blk-mq-tag.c |   11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- a/block/blk-mq-tag.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
@@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ restart:
 			return -1;
 		}
 		last_tag = tag + 1;
-	} while (test_and_set_bit_lock(tag, &bm->word));
+	} while (test_and_set_bit(tag, &bm->word));

 	return tag;
 }
@@ -342,11 +342,10 @@ static void bt_clear_tag(struct blk_mq_b
 	struct bt_wait_state *bs;
 	int wait_cnt;

-	/*
-	 * The unlock memory barrier need to order access to req in free
-	 * path and clearing tag bit
-	 */
-	clear_bit_unlock(TAG_TO_BIT(bt, tag), &bt->map[index].word);
+	clear_bit(TAG_TO_BIT(bt, tag), &bt->map[index].word);
+
+	/* Ensure that the wait list checks occur after clear_bit(). */
+	smp_mb();

 	bs = bt_wake_ptr(bt);
 	if (!bs)

--
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/