linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: fix lazy vmap purging (use-after-free error)

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]

Message-Id: <200902240029.37815.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Date:	Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:29:36 +1100
From:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, stable@...nel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix lazy vmap purging (use-after-free error)

On Monday 23 February 2009 16:17:09 Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> The boot CPU runs in the context of its idle thread during boot-up.
> During this time, idle_cpu(0) will always return nonzero, which will
> fool Classic and Hierarchical RCU into deciding that a large chunk of
> the boot-up sequence is a big long quiescent state.  This in turn causes
> RCU to prematurely end grace periods during this time.
>
> This patch creates a new global variable that is set to 1 just before
> the boot CPU first enters the scheduler, after which the idle task
> really is idle.

Nice work all (btw. if this patch goes in rather than using system_state,
then please make the variable __read_mostly).

Vegard, I would like to still use your patch in vmalloc.c as well. It
solves a possible use-after-free with preemptible RCU, and also helps with
a patch I have to conditionally disable lazy vmap unmapping (for Xen).

We _could_ disable RCU there instead to solve the preemptible RCU bug, but
your patch I think is less overhead.

So with appropriate changelog update, please also resend your patch
(with Acked-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>)

Thanks,
Nick

> Located-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>
>  init/main.c         |    3 +++
>  kernel/rcuclassic.c |    4 +++-
>  kernel/rcutree.c    |    4 +++-
>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c
> index 8442094..51f4b71 100644
> --- a/init/main.c
> +++ b/init/main.c
> @@ -121,6 +121,8 @@ static char *static_command_line;
>  static char *execute_command;
>  static char *ramdisk_execute_command;
>
> +int idle_task_is_really_idle;	/* set to 1 late in boot. */
> +
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>  /* Setup configured maximum number of CPUs to activate */
>  unsigned int __initdata setup_max_cpus = NR_CPUS;
> @@ -463,6 +465,7 @@ static noinline void __init_refok rest_init(void)
>  	 * at least once to get things moving:
>  	 */
>  	init_idle_bootup_task(current);
> +	idle_task_is_really_idle = 1;
>  	preempt_enable_no_resched();
>  	schedule();
>  	preempt_disable();
> diff --git a/kernel/rcuclassic.c b/kernel/rcuclassic.c
> index bd5a900..a758fa6 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcuclassic.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcuclassic.c
> @@ -678,8 +678,10 @@ int rcu_needs_cpu(int cpu)
>   */
>  void rcu_check_callbacks(int cpu, int user)
>  {
> +	extern int idle_task_is_really_idle;
> +
>  	if (user ||
> -	    (idle_cpu(cpu) && !in_softirq() &&
> +	    (idle_cpu(cpu) && idle_task_is_really_idle && !in_softirq() &&
>  				hardirq_count() <= (1 << HARDIRQ_SHIFT))) {
>
>  		/*
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> index b2fd602..e996d85 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> @@ -947,8 +947,10 @@ static void rcu_do_batch(struct rcu_data *rdp)
>   */
>  void rcu_check_callbacks(int cpu, int user)
>  {
> +	extern int idle_task_is_really_idle;
> +
>  	if (user ||
> -	    (idle_cpu(cpu) && !in_softirq() &&
> +	    (idle_cpu(cpu) && idle_task_is_really_idle && !in_softirq() &&
>  				hardirq_count() <= (1 << HARDIRQ_SHIFT))) {
>
>  		/*
> --
> 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/


--
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/