linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/14] mm/hmm: HMM should have a callback before MM is destroyed v2

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: <7e87c1f9-5c1a-84fd-1f7f-55ffaaed8a66@nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Mar 2018 19:36:23 -0700
From:   John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To:     <jglisse@...hat.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
CC:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
        <stable@...r.kernel.org>, Evgeny Baskakov <ebaskakov@...dia.com>,
        Mark Hairgrove <mhairgrove@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] mm/hmm: HMM should have a callback before MM is
 destroyed v2

On 03/16/2018 12:14 PM, jglisse@...hat.com wrote:
> From: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>
> 

<snip>

> +static void hmm_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
> +{
> +	struct hmm *hmm = mm->hmm;
> +	struct hmm_mirror *mirror;
> +	struct hmm_mirror *mirror_next;
> +
> +	down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
> +	list_for_each_entry_safe(mirror, mirror_next, &hmm->mirrors, list) {
> +		list_del_init(&mirror->list);
> +		if (mirror->ops->release)
> +			mirror->ops->release(mirror);
> +	}
> +	up_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
> +}
> +

OK, as for actual code review:

This part of the locking looks good. However, I think it can race against
hmm_mirror_register(), because hmm_mirror_register() will just add a new 
mirror regardless.

So:

thread 1                                      thread 2
--------------                                -----------------
hmm_release                                   hmm_mirror_register 
    down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);                <blocked: waiting for sem>
        // deletes all list items
    up_write
                                                  unblocked: adds new mirror

...so I think we need a way to back out of any pending hmm_mirror_register()
calls, as part of the .release steps, right? It seems hard for the device driver,
which could be inside of hmm_mirror_register(), to handle that. Especially considering
that right now, hmm_mirror_register() will return success in this case--so
there is no indication that anything is wrong.

Maybe hmm_mirror_register() could return an error (and not add to the mirror list),
in such a situation, how's that sound?

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA