linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/4] md/bitmap: Fix list_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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <5557819E.1060001@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 16 May 2015 19:42:54 +0200
From:	Patrick Marlier <patrick.marlier@...il.com>
To:	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
	josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com,
	wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/4] md/bitmap: Fix list_entry_rcu usage



On 05/13/2015 04:58 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Tue, 12 May 2015 22:38:53 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 May 2015 15:46:26 -0700
>> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Patrick Marlier <patrick.marlier@...il.com>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Patrick Marlier <patrick.marlier@...il.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/md/bitmap.c | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/bitmap.c b/drivers/md/bitmap.c
>>> index 2bc56e2a3526..32901772e4ee 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/md/bitmap.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/md/bitmap.c
>>> @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde
>>>   	rcu_read_lock();
>>>   	if (rdev == NULL)
>>>   		/* start at the beginning */
>>> -		rdev = list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks, struct md_rdev, same_set);
>>> +		rdev = list_entry_rcu(mddev->disks.next, struct md_rdev, same_set);
>>
>> Hmm, this changes the semantics.
>>
>> The original code looks nasty, I first thought it was broken, but it
>> seems to work out of sheer luck (or clever hack)
>
> Definitely a clever hack - no question of "luck" here :-)
>
> It might makes sense to change it to use list_for_each_entry_from_rcu()
>
>    if (rdev == NULL)
>       rdev = list_entry_rcu(mddev->disks.next, struct md_rdev, same_set);
>    else {
>       rdev_dec_pending(rdev, mddev);
>       rdev = list_next_entry_rcu(rdev->same_set.next, struct md_rdev, same_set);
>    }
>    list_for_each_entry_from_rcu(rdev, ....)
>
> but there isn't a "list_next_entry_rcu"....
>
>
> Also, it would have been polity to at least 'cc' them Maintainer of this code
> in the original patch - no?

Sure my bad. I hesitated to CC maintainers. I was almost sure that it 
will be rejected so I wanted to avoid noise.


>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
>>
>>>   	else {
>>>   		/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */
>>>   		rdev_dec_pending(rdev, mddev);
>>
>>
>> What comes after this is:
>>
>> 	list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev, &mddev->disks, same_set) {
>> 		if (rdev->raid_disk >= 0 &&
>>
>> Now the original code had:
>>
>>    rdev = list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks, struct md_rdev, same_set);
>>
>> Where &mddev->disks would return the address of the disks field of
>> mddev which is a list head. Then it would get the 'same_set' offset,
>> which is 0, and rdev is pointing to a makeshift md_rdev struct. But it
>> isn't used, as the list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() has:
>>
>> #define list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(pos, head, member) 		\
>> 	for (pos = list_entry_rcu(pos->member.next, typeof(*pos), member); \
>> 	     &pos->member != (head);	\
>> 	     pos = list_entry_rcu(pos->member.next, typeof(*pos), member))
>>
>> Thus the first use of pos is pos->member.next or:
>>
>>    mddev->disks.next
>>
>> But now you converted it to rdev = mddev->disks.next, which means the
>> first use is:
>>
>>    pos = mddev->disks.next->next
>>
>> I think you are skipping the first element here.


struct mddev {
...
	struct list_head                disks;
...}

struct list_head {
         struct list_head *next, *prev;
};

The tricky thing is that "list_entry_rcu" before and after the patch is 
reading the same thing.

However in your case, the change I proposed is probably wrong I trust 
you on this side. :) What's your proposal to fix it with the rculist patch?

PS: In the rculist patch I proposed, I avoid the store and the atomic 
reload in the stack variable __ptr. (yeap, the 
rcu_dereference_raw/ACCESS_ONCE is a bit confusing because it implicitly 
do & on the parameter).

Thanks.
--
Pat
--
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/