linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] percpu: make this_cpu_generic

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]

Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:47:09 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu: make this_cpu_generic_read() atomic w.r.t.
 interrupts

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Tejun Heo wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 04:33:02PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, the generic this_cpu_read(), which is intended to be
> > > irq-safe, is not:
> > >
> > > #define this_cpu_generic_read(pcp)                                      \
> > > ({                                                                      \
> > >         typeof(pcp) __ret;                                              \
> > >         preempt_disable_notrace();                                      \
> > >         __ret = raw_cpu_generic_read(pcp);                              \
> > >         preempt_enable_notrace();                                       \
> > >         __ret;                                                          \
> > > })
> >
> > I see.  Yeah, that looks like the bug there.
> 
> This is a single fetch operation of a value that needs to be atomic. It
> really does not matter if an interrupt happens before or after that load
> because it could also occur before or after the preempt_enable/disable
> without the code being able to distinguish that case.
> 
> The fetch of a scalar value from memory is an atomic operation and that is
> required from all arches. There is an exception for double word fetches.

this_cpu_read_8() is a double word fetch on many 32bit architectures.

> Maybe we would need to special code that case but so far this does not
> seem to have been an issue.

Just because nobody ran into problem with that it is a non issue? That's
just hillarious.

It's obviously not correct and needs to be fixed _before_ someone has to go
through the pain of debugging such a problem.

Thanks,

	tglx