Message-ID: <20180424231934.GA17484@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:19:34 -0600
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, guro@...com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch v3 for-4.17] mm, oom: fix concurrent munlock and oom
 reaper unmap

On Tue 24-04-18 15:34:03, David Rientjes wrote:
> Since exit_mmap() is done without the protection of mm->mmap_sem, it is
> possible for the oom reaper to concurrently operate on an mm until
> MMF_OOM_SKIP is set.
> 
> This allows munlock_vma_pages_all() to concurrently run while the oom
> reaper is operating on a vma.  Since munlock_vma_pages_range() depends on
> clearing VM_LOCKED from vm_flags before actually doing the munlock to
> determine if any other vmas are locking the same memory, the check for
> VM_LOCKED in the oom reaper is racy.
> 
> This is especially noticeable on architectures such as powerpc where
> clearing a huge pmd requires serialize_against_pte_lookup().  If the pmd
> is zapped by the oom reaper during follow_page_mask() after the check for
> pmd_none() is bypassed, this ends up deferencing a NULL ptl or a kernel
> oops.
> 
> Fix this by manually freeing all possible memory from the mm before doing
> the munlock and then setting MMF_OOM_SKIP.  The oom reaper can not run on
> the mm anymore so the munlock is safe to do in exit_mmap().  It also
> matches the logic that the oom reaper currently uses for determining when
> to set MMF_OOM_SKIP itself, so there's no new risk of excessive oom
> killing.
> 
> This issue fixes CVE-2018-1000200.
> 
> Fixes: 212925802454 ("mm: oom: let oom_reap_task and exit_mmap run concurrently")
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org [4.14+]
> Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>

OK, now that I finally got that mmu_notifier_release will make all
further mmu notifier calls NOOP then this is indeed safe. Considering
that you take oom_lock, you can set MMF_OOM_SKIP inside that lock and
won't have to bother with the exclusive mmap_sem AFAICS. So the patch
can be simplified.

But other than that this looks like a right way to go. I would have
preferred to hide the oom locking and MMF_OOM_SKIP handling in exit_mmap
but this is mostly cosmetic.

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>

> ---
>  include/linux/oom.h |  2 ++
>  mm/mmap.c           | 44 ++++++++++++++----------
>  mm/oom_kill.c       | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
> --- a/include/linux/oom.h
> +++ b/include/linux/oom.h
> @@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ static inline int check_stable_address_space(struct mm_struct *mm)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +void __oom_reap_task_mm(struct mm_struct *mm);
> +
>  extern unsigned long oom_badness(struct task_struct *p,
>  		struct mem_cgroup *memcg, const nodemask_t *nodemask,
>  		unsigned long totalpages);
> diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
> --- a/mm/mmap.c
> +++ b/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -3015,6 +3015,32 @@ void exit_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm)
>  	/* mm's last user has gone, and its about to be pulled down */
>  	mmu_notifier_release(mm);
>  
> +	if (unlikely(mm_is_oom_victim(mm))) {
> +		/*
> +		 * Manually reap the mm to free as much memory as possible.
> +		 * Then, as the oom reaper does, set MMF_OOM_SKIP to disregard
> +		 * this mm from further consideration.  Taking mm->mmap_sem for
> +		 * write after setting MMF_OOM_SKIP will guarantee that the oom
> +		 * reaper will not run on this mm again after mmap_sem is
> +		 * dropped.
> +		 *
> +		 * Nothing can be holding mm->mmap_sem here and the above call
> +		 * to mmu_notifier_release(mm) ensures mmu notifier callbacks in
> +		 * __oom_reap_task_mm() will not block.
> +		 *
> +		 * This needs to be done before calling munlock_vma_pages_all(),
> +		 * which clears VM_LOCKED, otherwise the oom reaper cannot
> +		 * reliably test it.
> +		 */
> +		mutex_lock(&oom_lock);
> +		__oom_reap_task_mm(mm);
> +		mutex_unlock(&oom_lock);
> +
> +		set_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags);
> +		down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> +		up_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> +	}
> +
>  	if (mm->locked_vm) {
>  		vma = mm->mmap;
>  		while (vma) {
> @@ -3036,24 +3062,6 @@ void exit_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm)
>  	/* update_hiwater_rss(mm) here? but nobody should be looking */
>  	/* Use -1 here to ensure all VMAs in the mm are unmapped */
>  	unmap_vmas(&tlb, vma, 0, -1);
> -
> -	if (unlikely(mm_is_oom_victim(mm))) {
> -		/*
> -		 * Wait for oom_reap_task() to stop working on this
> -		 * mm. Because MMF_OOM_SKIP is already set before
> -		 * calling down_read(), oom_reap_task() will not run
> -		 * on this "mm" post up_write().
> -		 *
> -		 * mm_is_oom_victim() cannot be set from under us
> -		 * either because victim->mm is already set to NULL
> -		 * under task_lock before calling mmput and oom_mm is
> -		 * set not NULL by the OOM killer only if victim->mm
> -		 * is found not NULL while holding the task_lock.
> -		 */
> -		set_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags);
> -		down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> -		up_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> -	}
>  	free_pgtables(&tlb, vma, FIRST_USER_ADDRESS, USER_PGTABLES_CEILING);
>  	tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, 0, -1);
>  
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -469,7 +469,6 @@ bool process_shares_mm(struct task_struct *p, struct mm_struct *mm)
>  	return false;
>  }
>  
> -
>  #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>  /*
>   * OOM Reaper kernel thread which tries to reap the memory used by the OOM
> @@ -480,16 +479,54 @@ static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(oom_reaper_wait);
>  static struct task_struct *oom_reaper_list;
>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(oom_reaper_lock);
>  
> -static bool __oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
> +void __oom_reap_task_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
>  {
> -	struct mmu_gather tlb;
>  	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Tell all users of get_user/copy_from_user etc... that the content
> +	 * is no longer stable. No barriers really needed because unmapping
> +	 * should imply barriers already and the reader would hit a page fault
> +	 * if it stumbled over a reaped memory.
> +	 */
> +	set_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags);
> +
> +	for (vma = mm->mmap ; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> +		if (!can_madv_dontneed_vma(vma))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Only anonymous pages have a good chance to be dropped
> +		 * without additional steps which we cannot afford as we
> +		 * are OOM already.
> +		 *
> +		 * We do not even care about fs backed pages because all
> +		 * which are reclaimable have already been reclaimed and
> +		 * we do not want to block exit_mmap by keeping mm ref
> +		 * count elevated without a good reason.
> +		 */
> +		if (vma_is_anonymous(vma) || !(vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED)) {
> +			const unsigned long start = vma->vm_start;
> +			const unsigned long end = vma->vm_end;
> +			struct mmu_gather tlb;
> +
> +			tlb_gather_mmu(&tlb, mm, start, end);
> +			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(mm, start, end);
> +			unmap_page_range(&tlb, vma, start, end, NULL);
> +			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(mm, start, end);
> +			tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, start, end);
> +		}
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +static bool oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
> +{
>  	bool ret = true;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * We have to make sure to not race with the victim exit path
>  	 * and cause premature new oom victim selection:
> -	 * __oom_reap_task_mm		exit_mm
> +	 * oom_reap_task_mm		exit_mm
>  	 *   mmget_not_zero
>  	 *				  mmput
>  	 *				    atomic_dec_and_test
> @@ -534,39 +571,8 @@ static bool __oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
>  
>  	trace_start_task_reaping(tsk->pid);
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * Tell all users of get_user/copy_from_user etc... that the content
> -	 * is no longer stable. No barriers really needed because unmapping
> -	 * should imply barriers already and the reader would hit a page fault
> -	 * if it stumbled over a reaped memory.
> -	 */
> -	set_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags);
> -
> -	for (vma = mm->mmap ; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> -		if (!can_madv_dontneed_vma(vma))
> -			continue;
> +	__oom_reap_task_mm(mm);
>  
> -		/*
> -		 * Only anonymous pages have a good chance to be dropped
> -		 * without additional steps which we cannot afford as we
> -		 * are OOM already.
> -		 *
> -		 * We do not even care about fs backed pages because all
> -		 * which are reclaimable have already been reclaimed and
> -		 * we do not want to block exit_mmap by keeping mm ref
> -		 * count elevated without a good reason.
> -		 */
> -		if (vma_is_anonymous(vma) || !(vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED)) {
> -			const unsigned long start = vma->vm_start;
> -			const unsigned long end = vma->vm_end;
> -
> -			tlb_gather_mmu(&tlb, mm, start, end);
> -			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(mm, start, end);
> -			unmap_page_range(&tlb, vma, start, end, NULL);
> -			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(mm, start, end);
> -			tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, start, end);
> -		}
> -	}
>  	pr_info("oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s), now anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lukB\n",
>  			task_pid_nr(tsk), tsk->comm,
>  			K(get_mm_counter(mm, MM_ANONPAGES)),
> @@ -587,14 +593,13 @@ static void oom_reap_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
>  	struct mm_struct *mm = tsk->signal->oom_mm;
>  
>  	/* Retry the down_read_trylock(mmap_sem) a few times */
> -	while (attempts++ < MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES && !__oom_reap_task_mm(tsk, mm))
> +	while (attempts++ < MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES && !oom_reap_task_mm(tsk, mm))
>  		schedule_timeout_idle(HZ/10);
>  
>  	if (attempts <= MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES ||
>  	    test_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags))
>  		goto done;
>  
> -
>  	pr_info("oom_reaper: unable to reap pid:%d (%s)\n",
>  		task_pid_nr(tsk), tsk->comm);
>  	debug_show_all_locks();

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists