linux-kernel - Re: Question about PRIVATE

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: <49CC693D.8050901@cosmosbay.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Mar 2009 06:50:53 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about PRIVATE_FUTEX

Minchan Kim a écrit :
> Thanks for kind explanation.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com> wrote:
>> Minchan Kim a écrit :
>>> Hi, Peter and Eric.
>>>
>>> I am not expert about futex.
>>> I am sorry if this is dumb question.
>>>
>>> If we use private futex, get_futex_key don't call get_user_pages_fast
>>> which pins page at page table.
>>> Then, get_futex_value_locked calls __cpy_from_user_inatomic with
>>> pagefault_disable.
>>>
>>> Who make sure the user page is mapped at app's page table ?
>>>
>> Nothing makes sure user page is mapped, as we dont have to (for private futexes
>> at least, since the 'key' is a combination of the futex virtual address (not
>> depending on the underlying physical page) and the task mm (sort of a static
>> offset per task)
>> If no page is mapped, a normal error should be returned to user, since
>> access to futex location will trigger a fault.
>>
> 
> I mean as follows.
> It seems even shared futex case.
> 
> After calling get_user_pages_fast, get_futex_key calls unlock_page and
> put_page, too.  Then futex_wait  calls get_futex_value_locked.
> 
> Generally, current page->count is one and nolocked.
> I think kernel reclaimer can reclaim the page.
> 
> Wouldn't kernel reclaim the page between get_fuex_key and
> get_futex_value_locked ?
> If kernel reclaimed the page, __copy_from_user_inatomic can happens
> page fault although pagefault_disable is on.
> 
> How do we make sure this race condition ?
> Do I miss something ?
> 

Hmmm, so your question is not about PRIVATE futexes, but shared ones.

I guess if page is no more present, its not a problem since
get_futex_value_locked() returns an error. We then take a slow
path, calling get_user() and retrying whole futex logic.

However, comment at line 1213 is misleading I guess, since
we dont hold mmap semaphore anymore ?

         * for shared futexes, we hold the mmap semaphore, so the mapping
         * cannot have changed since we looked it up in get_futex_key.
         */
        ret = get_futex_value_locked(&uval, uaddr);

So if page was un-mapped by another thread, and re-mapped to another physical
page, then this thread might sleep on 'kernel futex' not anymore reachable...

User error, as it is not supposed to happen in a sane program, undefined
result...



--
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/