| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0803071955490.13626@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 20:29:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@...sapeake.net>
cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
riel@...hat.com, Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eventfd signal race in aio_complete()
[cc-ing zab]
On Fri, 7 Mar 2008, Jeff Roberson wrote:
> Hello,
Hi!
> I have an application that makes use of eventfd to merge socket and aio
> blocking with epoll in one thread. Under heavy loads the application
> sometimes hangs when we receive notification from epoll that the eventfd has
> an event ready but reading the aio completions produces no results. Further
> investigation revealed that the aiocb was later ready with no new event and
> completing it based on a timer resolved the application hang.
>
> This pointed to the eventfd being signaled prematurely and I verified that
> this was indeed the problem. aio_complete() calls eventfd_signal() before the
> event is actually placed on the completion ring. On a multi-processor system
> it is possible to read the event from epoll and return to userspace before
> aio_complete() finishes.
>
> The enclosed patch simply moves the signaling to the bottom of the function.
> I'm not 100% familiar with this code and it looks like it may be possible to
> have spurious wakeups now but there will be no missed wakeups. An application
> may also race the other way now and receive aio completion before the signal,
> thus still leaving it with a signal with no completion. signaling while the
> kioctx is locked would resolve this but I was hesitant to introduce further
> nesting of spinlocks that might have another order elsewhere.
Your patch access the iocb after the __aio_put_req() call, that can make
the iocb (and the reference to the ki_eventfd) to become invalid. It also
has the spurious wakeup issue (not a biggie, but if it can be avoided).
There're two solutions AFAICS. The first solution/patch get a reference to
the file*, and signal (if the event has really been dropped inside the
ring) and release.
The second solution/patch simply moves the eventfd_signal() call before
the __aio_put_req() call, but after the event has beed "ringed".
We should be clear to go with the shorter/nicer second solution. Those
patches builds, but I'm not even signing them off till I tested them.
- Davide
---
fs/aio.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.mod/fs/aio.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.mod.orig/fs/aio.c 2008-03-07 19:33:44.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.mod/fs/aio.c 2008-03-07 19:45:50.000000000 -0800
@@ -916,7 +916,8 @@
struct kioctx *ctx = iocb->ki_ctx;
struct aio_ring_info *info;
struct aio_ring *ring;
- struct io_event *event;
+ struct io_event *event = NULL;
+ struct file *file = NULL;
unsigned long flags;
unsigned long tail;
int ret;
@@ -937,12 +938,15 @@
}
/*
- * Check if the user asked us to deliver the result through an
- * eventfd. The eventfd_signal() function is safe to be called
- * from IRQ context.
+ * Get a reference now, but do not deliver the event until
+ * we're sure we actually dropped it inside the ring. We
+ * need to get a reference before calling __aio_put_req(),
+ * since the ->ki_eventfd may become invalid after such call.
*/
- if (!IS_ERR(iocb->ki_eventfd))
- eventfd_signal(iocb->ki_eventfd, 1);
+ if (!IS_ERR(iocb->ki_eventfd)) {
+ file = iocb->ki_eventfd;
+ get_file(file);
+ }
info = &ctx->ring_info;
@@ -1000,6 +1004,19 @@
wake_up(&ctx->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ctx->ctx_lock, flags);
+
+ /*
+ * If the user requested us to deliver a completion event to an
+ * eventfd file descriptor *and* we actually delivered the event,
+ * signal it with eventfd_signal(). The eventfd_signal() function
+ * is safe to be called from IRQ context.
+ */
+ if (file) {
+ if (event)
+ eventfd_signal(file, 1);
+ fput(file);
+ }
+
return ret;
}
---
fs/aio.c | 17 +++++++++--------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.mod/fs/aio.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.mod.orig/fs/aio.c 2008-03-07 20:14:55.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.mod/fs/aio.c 2008-03-07 20:15:24.000000000 -0800
@@ -936,14 +936,6 @@
return 1;
}
- /*
- * Check if the user asked us to deliver the result through an
- * eventfd. The eventfd_signal() function is safe to be called
- * from IRQ context.
- */
- if (!IS_ERR(iocb->ki_eventfd))
- eventfd_signal(iocb->ki_eventfd, 1);
-
info = &ctx->ring_info;
/* add a completion event to the ring buffer.
@@ -992,6 +984,15 @@
kunmap_atomic(ring, KM_IRQ1);
pr_debug("added to ring %p at [%lu]\n", iocb, tail);
+
+ /*
+ * Check if the user asked us to deliver the result through an
+ * eventfd. The eventfd_signal() function is safe to be called
+ * from IRQ context.
+ */
+ if (!IS_ERR(iocb->ki_eventfd))
+ eventfd_signal(iocb->ki_eventfd, 1);
+
put_rq:
/* everything turned out well, dispose of the aiocb. */
ret = __aio_put_req(ctx, iocb);
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists