linux-kernel - Re: kobject lifetime issues in blk-mq

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181120132836.GA22666@ming.t460p>
Date:   Tue, 20 Nov 2018 21:28:37 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kobject lifetime issues in blk-mq

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 01:53:47PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 12:34:40PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 1:56 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> >> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 08:36:17AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> >> > So even if you think the kernel is not going to do this, remember, you
> >> >> > have no control over it.  Reference counted objects are done this way
> >> >> > for a reason, you really do not know who has a reference and you really
> >> >> > do not care.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You are just papering over the real issue here, see my previous email
> >> >> > for how to start working on resolving it.
> >> >>
> >> >> IMO, there isn't real issue, and the issue is actually in 'delay release'.
> >> >
> >> > Nope, sorry, that is not true.
> >> >
> >> >> Please look at the code in block/blk-mq-sysfs.c, both q->mq_kobj and all
> >> >> ctx->kobj share same lifetime with q->kobj, we even don't call get/put
> >> >> on q->mq_kobj & all ctx->kobj, and all are simply released in q->kobj's
> >> >> release handler.
> >> >
> >> > How do you "know" you are keeping those lifetimes in sync?  The joy of a
> >> > kobject is that _ANYTHING_ can grab a reference to your object without
> >> > you knowing about it.  That includes userspace programs.  Yes, sysfs is
> >> > now much better and it trys to release that reference "quickly" when it
> >> > determines you are trying to delete a kobject, but it's not perfict,
> >> > there are still races there.
> >> >
> >> > And that is what the delay release code is showing you.  It is showing
> >> > you that you "think" your reference counting is wrong, but it is not.
> >> > It is showing you that if someone else grabs a reference, you are not
> >> > correctly cleaning up for yourself.
> >> >
> >> > Never think that you really know the lifetime of a kobject, once you
> >> > realize that your code gets simpler and you can then just "trust" that
> >> > the kernel will do the right thing no matter what.
> >> >
> >> > Because really, you are using a kobject because you want that correct
> >> > reference counting logic.  By ignoring that logic, you are ignoring the
> >> > reason to be using that object at all.  If you don't need reference
> >> > counting, then don't use it at all.
> >> >
> >> > And if you need sysfs files, then you need to use the kobject and then
> >> > you need to handle it properly, because again, you do NOT have full
> >> > control over the lifetime of your object.  That's the basis for
> >> > reference counting in the firstplace.
> >> >
> >> > So this code is broken without me evening having to look at it, please
> >> > fix it to handle release properly.  Again, the kernel tried to tell you
> >> > this, but you hacked around the kernel core to remove that warning
> >> > incorrectly.  Please go read the kobject documentation again for even
> >> > more details about this than what I said here.
> >> >
> >> > thanks,
> >> >
> >> > greg k-h
> >>
> >> Whoever is the right person to fix this, please prioritize this to the
> >> degree possible.
> >> This issue does not allow to use DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE in any
> >> automated testing (in particular syzbot) on both upstream and stable
> >> trees. We have to disable it for now, so other bugs won't be noticed
> >> and will pile up.
> >
> > Patches for this have already been posted :)
> 
> 
> This is great.
> What is the patch name? I can't find anything that looks relevant on
> LKML searching by kobject.

https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=154270006101625&w=2

Thanks,
Ming