linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel: fix data race in put

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: <20150918134937.GX3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:49:37 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	"ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"mhocko@...e.cz" <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"ktsan@...glegroups.com" <ktsan@...glegroups.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
	Hans Boehm <hboehm@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: fix data race in put_pid

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 03:44:53PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 09/18, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > +static inline int atomic_read_ctrl(atomic_t *v)
> > +{
> > +	int val = atomic_read(v);
> > +	smp_read_barrier_depends(); /* Enforce control dependency. */
> > +	return val;
> > +}
> 
> Help. I am starting to think that the control dependencies is even more
> hard to understand that memory barriers...

Hehe, think of then as a load-store barrier; due to the 'impossibility'
of speculative stores (we'd see all kinds of random crap if you could
speculate stores).

> So I assume that if we have
> 
> 	int X = 0;
> 	atomic_t Y = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> 
> 	void w(void)
> 	{
> 		X = 1;
> 		atomic_inc_return(&Y);
> 	}
> 
> then
> 
> 	void r(void)
> 	{
> 		if (atomic_read_ctrl(&Y))
> 			BUG_ON(X == 0);
> 	}
> 
> should be correct?  Why?

Nope, because its (again) a load-load order you have there.
--
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/