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: <20180521210505.290599689@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 21 May 2018 23:11:12 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...iumnetworks.com>,
        Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@....com>,
        Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.16 015/110] KVM: arm/arm64: Properly protect VGIC locks from IRQs

4.16-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>

commit 388d4359680b56dba82fe2ffca05871e9fd2b73e upstream.

As Jan reported [1], lockdep complains about the VGIC not being bullet
proof. This seems to be due to two issues:
- When commit 006df0f34930 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Support calling
  vgic_update_irq_pending from irq context") promoted irq_lock and
  ap_list_lock to _irqsave, we forgot two instances of irq_lock.
  lockdeps seems to pick those up.
- If a lock is _irqsave, any other locks we take inside them should be
  _irqsafe as well. So the lpi_list_lock needs to be promoted also.

This fixes both issues by simply making the remaining instances of those
locks _irqsave.
One irq_lock is addressed in a separate patch, to simplify backporting.

[1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2018-May/575718.html

Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Fixes: 006df0f34930 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Support calling vgic_update_irq_pending from irq context")
Reported-by: Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...iumnetworks.com>
Acked-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@....com>
Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c |    5 +++--
 virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c   |   10 ++++++----
 virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c       |   22 ++++++++++++++--------
 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c
@@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ static int vgic_debug_show(struct seq_fi
 	struct vgic_state_iter *iter = (struct vgic_state_iter *)v;
 	struct vgic_irq *irq;
 	struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = NULL;
+	unsigned long flags;
 
 	if (iter->dist_id == 0) {
 		print_dist_state(s, &kvm->arch.vgic);
@@ -227,9 +228,9 @@ static int vgic_debug_show(struct seq_fi
 		irq = &kvm->arch.vgic.spis[iter->intid - VGIC_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS];
 	}
 
-	spin_lock(&irq->irq_lock);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
 	print_irq_state(s, irq, vcpu);
-	spin_unlock(&irq->irq_lock);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
 
 	return 0;
 }
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
@@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(str
 {
 	struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
 	struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(kvm, NULL, intid), *oldirq;
+	unsigned long flags;
 	int ret;
 
 	/* In this case there is no put, since we keep the reference. */
@@ -71,7 +72,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(str
 	irq->intid = intid;
 	irq->target_vcpu = vcpu;
 
-	spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 
 	/*
 	 * There could be a race with another vgic_add_lpi(), so we need to
@@ -99,7 +100,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(str
 	dist->lpi_list_count++;
 
 out_unlock:
-	spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 
 	/*
 	 * We "cache" the configuration table entries in our struct vgic_irq's.
@@ -315,6 +316,7 @@ static int vgic_copy_lpi_list(struct kvm
 {
 	struct vgic_dist *dist = &vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic;
 	struct vgic_irq *irq;
+	unsigned long flags;
 	u32 *intids;
 	int irq_count, i = 0;
 
@@ -330,7 +332,7 @@ static int vgic_copy_lpi_list(struct kvm
 	if (!intids)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
-	spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 	list_for_each_entry(irq, &dist->lpi_list_head, lpi_list) {
 		if (i == irq_count)
 			break;
@@ -339,7 +341,7 @@ static int vgic_copy_lpi_list(struct kvm
 			continue;
 		intids[i++] = irq->intid;
 	}
-	spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 
 	*intid_ptr = intids;
 	return i;
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
@@ -40,9 +40,13 @@ struct vgic_global kvm_vgic_global_state
  * kvm->lock (mutex)
  *   its->cmd_lock (mutex)
  *     its->its_lock (mutex)
- *       vgic_cpu->ap_list_lock
- *         kvm->lpi_list_lock
- *           vgic_irq->irq_lock
+ *       vgic_cpu->ap_list_lock		must be taken with IRQs disabled
+ *         kvm->lpi_list_lock		must be taken with IRQs disabled
+ *           vgic_irq->irq_lock		must be taken with IRQs disabled
+ *
+ * As the ap_list_lock might be taken from the timer interrupt handler,
+ * we have to disable IRQs before taking this lock and everything lower
+ * than it.
  *
  * If you need to take multiple locks, always take the upper lock first,
  * then the lower ones, e.g. first take the its_lock, then the irq_lock.
@@ -69,8 +73,9 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_get_lpi(str
 {
 	struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
 	struct vgic_irq *irq = NULL;
+	unsigned long flags;
 
-	spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 
 	list_for_each_entry(irq, &dist->lpi_list_head, lpi_list) {
 		if (irq->intid != intid)
@@ -86,7 +91,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_get_lpi(str
 	irq = NULL;
 
 out_unlock:
-	spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 
 	return irq;
 }
@@ -127,19 +132,20 @@ static void vgic_irq_release(struct kref
 void vgic_put_irq(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
 {
 	struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
+	unsigned long flags;
 
 	if (irq->intid < VGIC_MIN_LPI)
 		return;
 
-	spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 	if (!kref_put(&irq->refcount, vgic_irq_release)) {
-		spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 		return;
 	};
 
 	list_del(&irq->lpi_list);
 	dist->lpi_list_count--;
-	spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
 
 	kfree(irq);
 }


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ