linux-kernel - [PATCH v1 2/3] blk-mq: comment on races related with timeout handler

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: <20170317095711.5819-3-tom.leiming@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Mar 2017 17:57:10 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Yi Zhang <yizhan@...hat.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
        Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH v1 2/3] blk-mq: comment on races related with timeout handler

This patch adds comment on two races related with
timeout handler:

- requeue from queue busy vs. timeout
- rq free & reallocation vs. timeout

Both the races themselves and current solution aren't
explicit enough, so add comments on them.

Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
---
 block/blk-mq.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)

diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 08a49c69738b..7068779d3bac 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -527,6 +527,15 @@ void blk_mq_start_request(struct request *rq)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_mq_start_request);
 
+/*
+ * When we reach here because queue is busy, REQ_ATOM_COMPLETE
+ * flag isn't set yet, so there may be race with timeout hanlder,
+ * but given rq->deadline is just set in .queue_rq() under
+ * this sitation, the race won't be possible in reality because
+ * rq->timeout should be set as big enough to cover the window
+ * between blk_mq_start_request() called from .queue_rq() and
+ * clearing REQ_ATOM_STARTED here.
+ */
 static void __blk_mq_requeue_request(struct request *rq)
 {
 	struct request_queue *q = rq->q;
@@ -700,6 +709,19 @@ static void blk_mq_check_expired(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
 	if (!test_bit(REQ_ATOM_STARTED, &rq->atomic_flags))
 		return;
 
+	/*
+	 * The rq being checked may have been freed and reallocated
+	 * out already here, we avoid this race by checking rq->deadline
+	 * and REQ_ATOM_COMPLETE flag together:
+	 *
+	 * - if rq->deadline is observed as new value because of
+	 *   reusing, the rq won't be timed out because of timing.
+	 * - if rq->deadline is observed as previous value,
+	 *   REQ_ATOM_COMPLETE flag won't be cleared in reuse path
+	 *   because we put a barrier between setting rq->deadline
+	 *   and clearing the flag in blk_mq_start_request(), so
+	 *   this rq won't be timed out too.
+	 */
 	if (time_after_eq(jiffies, rq->deadline)) {
 		if (!blk_mark_rq_complete(rq))
 			blk_mq_rq_timed_out(rq, reserved);
-- 
2.9.3