linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] futex: Remove unnecessary warning from get_futex

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: <20170809144309.no7x6hpj6rgwfnvg@suse.de>
Date:   Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:43:09 +0100
From:   Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] futex: Remove unnecessary warning from get_futex_key

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 03:05:19PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
> > index 16dbe4c93895..f50b434756c1 100644
> > --- a/kernel/futex.c
> > +++ b/kernel/futex.c
> > @@ -670,13 +670,14 @@ get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union futex_key *key, int rw)
> >  		 * this reference was taken by ihold under the page lock
> >  		 * pinning the inode in place so i_lock was unnecessary. The
> >  		 * only way for this check to fail is if the inode was
> > -		 * truncated in parallel so warn for now if this happens.
> > +		 * truncated in parallel which is almost certainly an
> > +		 * application bug. In such a case, just retry.
> >  		 *
> >  		 * We are not calling into get_futex_key_refs() in file-backed
> >  		 * cases, therefore a successful atomic_inc return below will
> >  		 * guarantee that get_futex_key() will still imply smp_mb(); (B).
> >  		 */
> > -		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!atomic_inc_not_zero(&inode->i_count))) {
> > +		if (!atomic_inc_not_zero(&inode->i_count)) {
> 
> I applied the same diff yesterday, and haven't seen anything go wrong
> with my test case and/or with Syzkaller running, so FWIW:
> 
> Tested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> 
> Thanks for putting this together!
> 

No problem. FWIW, I had the test case running for 12 hours in a loop as
well and other than having to adjust the number of threads doing futex()
to trigger the warning without the patch, I observed no other problems.
If Thomas is happy, I hope this can be merged for 4.13 (or picked up
directly by Linus if he feels like it). Even if it's delayed, I'll resubmit
to -stable manually if the "Cc: stable" gets stripped along the way.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs