[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160618025904-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 03:09:02 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] vhost, mm: make sure that oom_reaper doesn't reap
memory read by vhost
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 11:00:17AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
>
> vhost driver relies on copy_from_user/get_user from a kernel thread.
> This makes it impossible to reap the memory of an oom victim which
> shares mm with the vhost kernel thread because it could see a zero
> page unexpectedly and theoretically make an incorrect decision visible
> outside of the killed task context.
>
> Make sure that each place which can read from userspace is annotated
> properly and it uses copy_from_user_mm, __get_user_mm resp.
> copy_from_iter_mm. Each will get the target mm as an argument and it
> performs a pessimistic check to rule out that the oom_reaper could
> possibly unmap the particular page. __oom_reap_task then just needs to
> mark the mm as unstable before it unmaps any page.
>
> This is a preparatory patch without any functional changes because
> the oom reaper doesn't touch mm shared with kthreads yet.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Will review. Answer to question below:
> ---
> Hi Michael,
> we have discussed [1] that vhost_worker pins the mm of a potential
> oom victim for too long which result into an OOM storm when other
> processes have to be killed. One way to address this issue would
> be to pin mm_count rather than mm_users and revalidate it before
> actually doing the copy (mmget_not_zero). You had concerns about
> more atomic operations in the data path. Another way would be to
> postpone exit_mm_victim to after exit_task_work but as it turned
> out other task might have the device open and pin the mm indirectly
> [2].
>
> Now I would like to attack the issue from another side which would
> be more generic. I would like to make mm's which are shared with
> kthreads oom reapable in general. This is currently not allowed
> because we do not want to risk that a kthread would see an already
> unmapped page - aka see a newly allocated zero page. At the same
> time this is really desirable because it helps to guarantee a forward
> progress on the OOM.
>
> It seems that vhost usage would suffer from this problem because
> it reads from the userspace to get (status) flags and makes some
> decisions based on the read value. I do not understand the code so I
> couldn't evaluate whether that would lead to some real problems so I
> conservatively assumed it wouldn't handle that gracefully.
Getting an error from __get_user and friends is handled gracefully.
Getting zero instead of a real value will cause userspace
memory corruption.
> If this is
> incorrect and all the paths can just cope with seeing zeros unexpectedly
> then great and I will drop the patch and move over to the oom specific
> further steps.
>
> Therefore I am proposing a kthread safe API which allows to read from
> userspace and also makes sure to do a proper exclusion with the oom
> reaper. A race would be reported by EFAULT which is already handled.
> Performance wise it would add two tests to the copy from user
> paths. Does the following change makes sense to you and would be
> acceptable? If yes I will follow up with another patch which will allow
> oom reaper for mm shared with kthread.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1456765329-14890-1-git-send-email-vdavydov@virtuozzo.com
> [2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160301181136-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com
>
> drivers/vhost/scsi.c | 2 +-
> drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> include/linux/sched.h | 1 +
> include/linux/uaccess.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/uio.h | 10 ++++++++++
> mm/oom_kill.c | 6 ++++++
> 6 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/scsi.c b/drivers/vhost/scsi.c
> index 0e6fd556c982..2c8dc0b9a21f 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/scsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/scsi.c
> @@ -932,7 +932,7 @@ vhost_scsi_handle_vq(struct vhost_scsi *vs, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> */
> iov_iter_init(&out_iter, WRITE, vq->iov, out, out_size);
>
> - ret = copy_from_iter(req, req_size, &out_iter);
> + ret = copy_from_iter_mm(vq->dev->mm, req, req_size, &out_iter);
> if (unlikely(ret != req_size)) {
> vq_err(vq, "Faulted on copy_from_iter\n");
> vhost_scsi_send_bad_target(vs, vq, head, out);
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> index 669fef1e2bb6..14959ba43cb4 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> @@ -1212,7 +1212,7 @@ int vhost_vq_init_access(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> r = -EFAULT;
> goto err;
> }
> - r = __get_user(last_used_idx, &vq->used->idx);
> + r = __get_user_mm(vq->dev->mm, last_used_idx, &vq->used->idx);
> if (r)
> goto err;
> vq->last_used_idx = vhost16_to_cpu(vq, last_used_idx);
> @@ -1328,7 +1328,7 @@ static int get_indirect(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
> i, count);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> - if (unlikely(copy_from_iter(&desc, sizeof(desc), &from) !=
> + if (unlikely(copy_from_iter_mm(vq->dev->mm, &desc, sizeof(desc), &from) !=
> sizeof(desc))) {
> vq_err(vq, "Failed indirect descriptor: idx %d, %zx\n",
> i, (size_t)vhost64_to_cpu(vq, indirect->addr) + i * sizeof desc);
> @@ -1392,7 +1392,7 @@ int vhost_get_vq_desc(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
>
> /* Check it isn't doing very strange things with descriptor numbers. */
> last_avail_idx = vq->last_avail_idx;
> - if (unlikely(__get_user(avail_idx, &vq->avail->idx))) {
> + if (unlikely(__get_user_mm(vq->dev->mm, avail_idx, &vq->avail->idx))) {
> vq_err(vq, "Failed to access avail idx at %p\n",
> &vq->avail->idx);
> return -EFAULT;
> @@ -1414,7 +1414,7 @@ int vhost_get_vq_desc(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
>
> /* Grab the next descriptor number they're advertising, and increment
> * the index we've seen. */
> - if (unlikely(__get_user(ring_head,
> + if (unlikely(__get_user_mm(vq->dev->mm, ring_head,
> &vq->avail->ring[last_avail_idx & (vq->num - 1)]))) {
> vq_err(vq, "Failed to read head: idx %d address %p\n",
> last_avail_idx,
> @@ -1450,7 +1450,7 @@ int vhost_get_vq_desc(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
> i, vq->num, head);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> - ret = __copy_from_user(&desc, vq->desc + i, sizeof desc);
> + ret = __copy_from_user_mm(vq->dev->mm, &desc, vq->desc + i, sizeof desc);
> if (unlikely(ret)) {
> vq_err(vq, "Failed to get descriptor: idx %d addr %p\n",
> i, vq->desc + i);
> @@ -1622,7 +1622,7 @@ static bool vhost_notify(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
>
> if (!vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_RING_F_EVENT_IDX)) {
> __virtio16 flags;
> - if (__get_user(flags, &vq->avail->flags)) {
> + if (__get_user_mm(dev->mm, flags, &vq->avail->flags)) {
> vq_err(vq, "Failed to get flags");
> return true;
> }
> @@ -1636,7 +1636,7 @@ static bool vhost_notify(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> if (unlikely(!v))
> return true;
>
> - if (__get_user(event, vhost_used_event(vq))) {
> + if (__get_user_mm(dev->mm, event, vhost_used_event(vq))) {
> vq_err(vq, "Failed to get used event idx");
> return true;
> }
> @@ -1678,7 +1678,7 @@ bool vhost_vq_avail_empty(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> __virtio16 avail_idx;
> int r;
>
> - r = __get_user(avail_idx, &vq->avail->idx);
> + r = __get_user_mm(dev->mm, avail_idx, &vq->avail->idx);
> if (r)
> return false;
>
> @@ -1713,7 +1713,7 @@ bool vhost_enable_notify(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> /* They could have slipped one in as we were doing that: make
> * sure it's written, then check again. */
> smp_mb();
> - r = __get_user(avail_idx, &vq->avail->idx);
> + r = __get_user_mm(dev->mm,avail_idx, &vq->avail->idx);
space after , pls
> if (r) {
> vq_err(vq, "Failed to check avail idx at %p: %d\n",
> &vq->avail->idx, r);
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 6d81a1eb974a..2b00ac7faa18 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -513,6 +513,7 @@ static inline int get_dumpable(struct mm_struct *mm)
> #define MMF_RECALC_UPROBES 20 /* MMF_HAS_UPROBES can be wrong */
> #define MMF_OOM_REAPED 21 /* mm has been already reaped */
> #define MMF_OOM_NOT_REAPABLE 22 /* mm couldn't be reaped */
> +#define MMF_UNSTABLE 23 /* mm is unstable for copy_from_user */
>
> #define MMF_INIT_MASK (MMF_DUMPABLE_MASK | MMF_DUMP_FILTER_MASK)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/uaccess.h b/include/linux/uaccess.h
> index 349557825428..b1f314fca3c8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/uaccess.h
> +++ b/include/linux/uaccess.h
> @@ -76,6 +76,28 @@ static inline unsigned long __copy_from_user_nocache(void *to,
> #endif /* ARCH_HAS_NOCACHE_UACCESS */
>
> /*
> + * A safe variant of __get_user for for use_mm() users to have a
> + * gurantee that the address space wasn't reaped in the background
> + */
> +#define __get_user_mm(mm, x, ptr) \
> +({ \
> + int ___gu_err = __get_user(x, ptr); \
> + if (!___gu_err && test_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags)) \
test_bit is somewhat expensive. See my old mail
x86/bitops: implement __test_bit
I dropped it as virtio just switched to simple &/| for features,
but we might need something like this now.
> + ___gu_err = -EFAULT; \
> + ___gu_err; \
> +})
> +
> +/* similar to __get_user_mm */
> +static inline __must_check long __copy_from_user_mm(struct mm_struct *mm,
> + void *to, const void __user * from, unsigned long n)
> +{
> + long ret = __copy_from_user(to, from, n);
> + if (!ret && test_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> * probe_kernel_read(): safely attempt to read from a location
> * @dst: pointer to the buffer that shall take the data
> * @src: address to read from
> diff --git a/include/linux/uio.h b/include/linux/uio.h
> index 1b5d1cd796e2..4be6b24003d8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/uio.h
> +++ b/include/linux/uio.h
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
> #ifndef __LINUX_UIO_H
> #define __LINUX_UIO_H
>
> +#include <linux/sched.h>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <uapi/linux/uio.h>
>
> @@ -84,6 +85,15 @@ size_t copy_page_from_iter(struct page *page, size_t offset, size_t bytes,
> struct iov_iter *i);
> size_t copy_to_iter(const void *addr, size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *i);
> size_t copy_from_iter(void *addr, size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *i);
> +
> +static inline size_t copy_from_iter_mm(struct mm_struct *mm, void *addr,
> + size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *i)
> +{
> + size_t ret = copy_from_iter(addr, bytes, i);
> + if (!IS_ERR_VALUE(ret) && test_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + return ret;
> +}
> size_t copy_from_iter_nocache(void *addr, size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *i);
> size_t iov_iter_zero(size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *);
> unsigned long iov_iter_alignment(const struct iov_iter *i);
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 6303bc7caeda..3fa43e96a59b 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -506,6 +506,12 @@ static bool __oom_reap_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
> goto mm_drop;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * Tell all users of get_user_mm/copy_from_user_mm that the content
> + * is no longer stable.
> + */
> + set_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags);
> +
do we need some kind of barrier after this?
and if yes - does flag read need a barrier before it too?
> tlb_gather_mmu(&tlb, mm, 0, -1);
> for (vma = mm->mmap ; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> if (is_vm_hugetlb_page(vma))
> --
> 2.8.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists