| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20171218230945.GX7829@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 15:09:45 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V3 -mm] mm, swap: Fix race between swapoff and some swap
operations
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:41:41PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com> writes:
>
> > From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
> >
> > When the swapin is performed, after getting the swap entry information
> > from the page table, system will swap in the swap entry, without any
> > lock held to prevent the swap device from being swapoff. This may
> > cause the race like below,
> >
> > CPU 1 CPU 2
> > ----- -----
> > do_swap_page
> > swapin_readahead
> > __read_swap_cache_async
> > swapoff swapcache_prepare
> > p->swap_map = NULL __swap_duplicate
> > p->swap_map[?] /* !!! NULL pointer access */
> >
> > Because swapoff is usually done when system shutdown only, the race
> > may not hit many people in practice. But it is still a race need to
> > be fixed.
> >
> > To fix the race, get_swap_device() is added to check whether the
> > specified swap entry is valid in its swap device. If so, it will keep
> > the swap entry valid via preventing the swap device from being
> > swapoff, until put_swap_device() is called.
> >
> > Because swapoff() is very race code path, to make the normal path runs
> > as fast as possible, RCU instead of reference count is used to
> > implement get/put_swap_device(). From get_swap_device() to
> > put_swap_device(), the RCU read lock is held, so synchronize_rcu() in
> > swapoff() will wait until put_swap_device() is called.
> >
> > In addition to swap_map, cluster_info, etc. data structure in the
> > struct swap_info_struct, the swap cache radix tree will be freed after
> > swapoff, so this patch fixes the race between swap cache looking up
> > and swapoff too.
> >
> > Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> > Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@...com>
> > Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> > Cc: "Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
> > Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> > Cc: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
> > Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
> >
> > Changelog:
> >
> > v3:
> >
> > - Re-implemented with RCU to reduce the overhead of normal paths
> >
> > v2:
> >
> > - Re-implemented with SRCU to reduce the overhead of normal paths.
> >
> > - Avoid to check whether the swap device has been swapoff in
> > get_swap_device(). Because we can check the origin of the swap
> > entry to make sure the swap device hasn't bee swapoff.
>
> A version implemented via stop_machine() could be gotten via a small
> patch as below. If you still prefer stop_machine(), I can resend a
> version implemented with stop_machine().
>
> And, it appears that if we replace smp_wmb() in _enable_swap_info() with
> stop_machine() in some way, we can avoid smp_rmb() in get_swap_device().
> This can reduce overhead in normal path further. Can we get same effect
> with RCU? For example, use synchronize_rcu() instead of stop_machine()?
>
> Hi, Paul, can you help me on this?
If the key loads before and after the smp_rmb() are within the same
RCU read-side critical section, -and- if one of the critical writes is
before the synchronize_rcu() and the other critical write is after the
synchronize_rcu(), then you normally don't need the smp_rmb().
Otherwise, you likely do still need the smp_rmb().
Thanx, Paul
> Best Regards,
> Huang, Ying
>
> ----------------8<------------------------------
> ---
> include/linux/swap.h | 2 +-
> mm/swapfile.c | 12 +++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/swap.h b/include/linux/swap.h
> index f7e8f26cf07f..1027169d5a04 100644
> --- a/include/linux/swap.h
> +++ b/include/linux/swap.h
> @@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ extern struct swap_info_struct *get_swap_device(swp_entry_t entry);
>
> static inline void put_swap_device(struct swap_info_struct *si)
> {
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> + preempt_enable();
> }
>
> #else /* CONFIG_SWAP */
> diff --git a/mm/swapfile.c b/mm/swapfile.c
> index ca7b4c5ebe34..feb13ce01045 100644
> --- a/mm/swapfile.c
> +++ b/mm/swapfile.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
> #include <linux/export.h>
> #include <linux/swap_slots.h>
> #include <linux/sort.h>
> +#include <linux/stop_machine.h>
>
> #include <asm/pgtable.h>
> #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
> @@ -1125,7 +1126,7 @@ struct swap_info_struct *get_swap_device(swp_entry_t entry)
> goto bad_nofile;
> si = swap_info[type];
>
> - rcu_read_lock();
> + preempt_disable();
> if (!(si->flags & SWP_VALID))
> goto unlock_out;
> /*
> @@ -1143,7 +1144,7 @@ struct swap_info_struct *get_swap_device(swp_entry_t entry)
> out:
> return NULL;
> unlock_out:
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> + preempt_enable();
> return NULL;
> }
>
> @@ -2581,6 +2582,11 @@ bool has_usable_swap(void)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int swapoff_stop(void *arg)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> SYSCALL_DEFINE1(swapoff, const char __user *, specialfile)
> {
> struct swap_info_struct *p = NULL;
> @@ -2677,7 +2683,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(swapoff, const char __user *, specialfile)
> * wait for swap operations protected by get/put_swap_device()
> * to complete
> */
> - synchronize_rcu();
> + stop_machine(swapoff_stop, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
>
> flush_work(&p->discard_work);
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists