linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] rcu: fix a race in hlist_nulls_for_each_entry

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <51A5D3D9.1000106@yandex-team.ru>
Date:	Wed, 29 May 2013 14:09:29 +0400
From:	Roman Gushchin <klamm@...dex-team.ru>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>, zhmurov@...dex-team.ru,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rcu: fix a race in hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu
 macro

On 29.05.2013 09:08, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 18:31 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 05:34:53PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 13:10 +0400, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>>>> On 28.05.2013 04:12, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> About your earlier question, I really don't know why compiler would
> cache a memory read if we explicitly use barrier() to prevent this from
> happening.

I agree.

> BTW Roman patch generates a double load as in :
>
> 2cb1:       49 8b 07                mov    (%r15),%rax
> 2cb4:       49 8b 07                mov    (%r15),%rax
>
>
> ...
> 2ea2:       e8 f9 dc ff ff          callq  ba0 <sock_put>
> 2ea7:       8b 0c 24                mov    (%rsp),%ecx
> 2eaa:       e9 02 fe ff ff          jmpq   2cb1 <udp4_lib_lookup2+0x91>
>
> because of ACCESS_ONCE() used twice, once explicitly in
> hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(), and once in rcu_dereference_raw()
>
> While barrier();ptr = rcu_dereference(X); does generate a single load.

It's true.

Unfortunately, using barrier() can also prevent gcc from making some
(acceptable) code optimizations, because barrier() has a global effect,
and everything we want to reload is the (head->first) pointer.
So, to be absolutely precise, we have to introduce and use
the ACCESS_FIELD_ONCE() macro.

In any case, it doesn't look like a big problem.
In my mind, the best solution is to use the ACCESS_FIELD_ONCE() macro,
but using barrier() is also an acceptable solution.

Regards,
Roman
--
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/