linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] mm: introduce a common interface for balloon pages mobility

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: <20120821162432.GG2456@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 Aug 2012 09:24:32 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] mm: introduce a common interface for balloon
 pages mobility

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 05:20:11PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 09:47 -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
> > +       mapping = rcu_access_pointer(page->mapping);
> > +       if (mapping)
> > +               mapping = mapping->assoc_mapping; 
> 
> The comment near rcu_access_pointer() explicitly says:
> 
>  * Return the value of the specified RCU-protected pointer, but omit the
>  * smp_read_barrier_depends() and keep the ACCESS_ONCE().  This is useful
>  * when the value of this pointer is accessed, but the pointer is not
>  * dereferenced,
> 
> Yet you dereference the pointer... smells like fail to me.

Indeed!

This will break DEC Alpha.  In addition, if ->mapping can transition
from non-NULL to NULL, and if you used rcu_access_pointer() rather
than rcu_dereference() to avoid lockdep-RCU from yelling at you about
not either being in an RCU read-side critical section or holding an
update-side lock, you can see failures as follows:

1.	CPU 0 runs the above code, picks up mapping, and finds it non-NULL.

2.	CPU 0 is preempted or otherwise delayed.  (Keep in mind that
	even disabling interrupts in a guest OS does not prevent the
	host hypervisor from preempting!)

3.	Some other CPU NULLs page->mapping.  Because CPU 0 isn't doing
	anything to prevent it, this other CPU frees the memory.

4.	CPU 0 resumes, and then accesses what is now the freelist.
	Arbitrarily bad things start happening.

If you are in a read-side critical section, use rcu_dereference() instead
of rcu_access_pointer().  If you are holding an update-side lock, use
rcu_dereference_protected() and say what lock you are holding.  If you
are doing something else, please say what it is.

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/