linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 12/32] ptr_ring: fix race conditions when resizing

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: <20170224083748.184009117@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2017 09:37:56 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 12/32] ptr_ring: fix race conditions when resizing

4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>


[ Upstream commit e71695307114335be1ed912f4a347396c2ed0e69 ]

Resizing currently drops consumer lock.  This can cause entries to be
reordered, which isn't good in itself.  More importantly, consumer can
detect a false ring empty condition and block forever.

Further, nesting of consumer within producer lock is problematic for
tun, since it produces entries in a BH, which causes a lock order
reversal:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  consume:
  lock(&(&r->consumer_lock)->rlock);
                               resize:
                               local_irq_disable();
                               lock(&(&r->producer_lock)->rlock);
                               lock(&(&r->consumer_lock)->rlock);
  <Interrupt>
  produce:
  lock(&(&r->producer_lock)->rlock);

To fix, nest producer lock within consumer lock during resize,
and keep consumer lock during the whole swap operation.

Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 include/linux/ptr_ring.h |   36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/include/linux/ptr_ring.h
+++ b/include/linux/ptr_ring.h
@@ -111,6 +111,11 @@ static inline int __ptr_ring_produce(str
 	return 0;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Note: resize (below) nests producer lock within consumer lock, so if you
+ * consume in interrupt or BH context, you must disable interrupts/BH when
+ * calling this.
+ */
 static inline int ptr_ring_produce(struct ptr_ring *r, void *ptr)
 {
 	int ret;
@@ -242,6 +247,11 @@ static inline void *__ptr_ring_consume(s
 	return ptr;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Note: resize (below) nests producer lock within consumer lock, so if you
+ * call this in interrupt or BH context, you must disable interrupts/BH when
+ * producing.
+ */
 static inline void *ptr_ring_consume(struct ptr_ring *r)
 {
 	void *ptr;
@@ -357,7 +367,7 @@ static inline void **__ptr_ring_swap_que
 	void **old;
 	void *ptr;
 
-	while ((ptr = ptr_ring_consume(r)))
+	while ((ptr = __ptr_ring_consume(r)))
 		if (producer < size)
 			queue[producer++] = ptr;
 		else if (destroy)
@@ -372,6 +382,12 @@ static inline void **__ptr_ring_swap_que
 	return old;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Note: producer lock is nested within consumer lock, so if you
+ * resize you must make sure all uses nest correctly.
+ * In particular if you consume ring in interrupt or BH context, you must
+ * disable interrupts/BH when doing so.
+ */
 static inline int ptr_ring_resize(struct ptr_ring *r, int size, gfp_t gfp,
 				  void (*destroy)(void *))
 {
@@ -382,17 +398,25 @@ static inline int ptr_ring_resize(struct
 	if (!queue)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&(r)->producer_lock, flags);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&(r)->consumer_lock, flags);
+	spin_lock(&(r)->producer_lock);
 
 	old = __ptr_ring_swap_queue(r, queue, size, gfp, destroy);
 
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&(r)->producer_lock, flags);
+	spin_unlock(&(r)->producer_lock);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&(r)->consumer_lock, flags);
 
 	kfree(old);
 
 	return 0;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Note: producer lock is nested within consumer lock, so if you
+ * resize you must make sure all uses nest correctly.
+ * In particular if you consume ring in interrupt or BH context, you must
+ * disable interrupts/BH when doing so.
+ */
 static inline int ptr_ring_resize_multiple(struct ptr_ring **rings, int nrings,
 					   int size,
 					   gfp_t gfp, void (*destroy)(void *))
@@ -412,10 +436,12 @@ static inline int ptr_ring_resize_multip
 	}
 
 	for (i = 0; i < nrings; ++i) {
-		spin_lock_irqsave(&(rings[i])->producer_lock, flags);
+		spin_lock_irqsave(&(rings[i])->consumer_lock, flags);
+		spin_lock(&(rings[i])->producer_lock);
 		queues[i] = __ptr_ring_swap_queue(rings[i], queues[i],
 						  size, gfp, destroy);
-		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&(rings[i])->producer_lock, flags);
+		spin_unlock(&(rings[i])->producer_lock);
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&(rings[i])->consumer_lock, flags);
 	}
 
 	for (i = 0; i < nrings; ++i)