linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v5 07/14] futex: Change locking rules

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, 7 Mar 2017 19:01:58 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, mingo@...nel.org,
        juri.lelli@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, xlpang@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        jdesfossez@...icios.com, bristot@...hat.com, dvhart@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5 07/14] futex: Change locking rules

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 05:47:44PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2017-03-07 14:22:14 [+0100], Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Both 'return' statements leak &pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock ....
> 
> this has unlock in both 'return's.

>  handle_fault:
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
>  	spin_unlock(q->lock_ptr);
>  
>  	ret = fault_in_user_writeable(uaddr);
>  
>  	spin_lock(q->lock_ptr);
> +	raw_spin_lock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Check if someone else fixed it for us:
>  	 */
> -	if (pi_state->owner != oldowner)
> +	if (pi_state->owner != oldowner) {
> +		raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
>  		return 0;
> +	}
>  
> -	if (ret)
> +	if (ret) {
> +		raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
>  		return ret;
> +	}
>  
>  	goto retry;
>  }

I had locally already fixed it with a common:

out_unlock:
  raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
  return ret;