linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/7] fscache: Fix race in fscache_op_complete() due to split atomic

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: <154359601645.18703.16410473531194112220.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 30 Nov 2018 16:40:16 +0000
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:     Kiran Kumar Modukuri <kiran.modukuri@...il.com>,
        dhowells@...hat.com, linux-cachefs@...hat.com,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/7] fscache: Fix race in fscache_op_complete() due to split
 atomic_sub & read

From: kiran.modukuri <kiran.modukuri@...il.com>

The code in fscache_retrieval_complete is using atomic_sub followed by an
atomic_read:

        atomic_sub(n_pages, &op->n_pages);
        if (atomic_read(&op->n_pages) <= 0)
                fscache_op_complete(&op->op, true);

This causes two threads doing a decrement of n_pages to race with each
other seeing the op->refcount 0 at same time - and they end up calling
fscache_op_complete() in both the threads leading to an assertion failure.

Fix this by using atomic_sub_return_relaxed() instead of two calls.  Note
that I'm using 'relaxed' rather than, say, 'release' as there aren't
multiple variables that appear to need ordering across the release.

The oops looks something like:

FS-Cache: Assertion failed
FS-Cache: 0 > 0 is false
...
kernel BUG at /usr/src/linux-4.4.0/fs/fscache/operation.c:449!
...
Workqueue: fscache_operation fscache_op_work_func [fscache]
...
RIP: 0010:[<ffffffffc037eacd>] fscache_op_complete+0x10d/0x180 [fscache]
...
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffffc1464cf9>] cachefiles_read_copier+0x3a9/0x410 [cachefiles]
 [<ffffffffc037e272>] fscache_op_work_func+0x22/0x50 [fscache]
 [<ffffffff81096da0>] process_one_work+0x150/0x3f0
 [<ffffffff8109751a>] worker_thread+0x11a/0x470
 [<ffffffff81808e59>] ? __schedule+0x359/0x980
 [<ffffffff81097400>] ? rescuer_thread+0x310/0x310
 [<ffffffff8109cdd6>] kthread+0xd6/0xf0
 [<ffffffff8109cd00>] ? kthread_park+0x60/0x60
 [<ffffffff8180d0cf>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70
 [<ffffffff8109cd00>] ? kthread_park+0x60/0x60

This seen this in 4.4.x kernels and the same bug affects fscache in latest
upstreams kernels.

Fixes: 1bb4b7f98f36 ("FS-Cache: The retrieval remaining-pages counter needs to be atomic_t")
Signed-off-by: Kiran Kumar Modukuri <kiran.modukuri@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
---

 include/linux/fscache-cache.h |    3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/fscache-cache.h b/include/linux/fscache-cache.h
index 34cf0fdd7dc7..610815e3f1aa 100644
--- a/include/linux/fscache-cache.h
+++ b/include/linux/fscache-cache.h
@@ -196,8 +196,7 @@ static inline void fscache_enqueue_retrieval(struct fscache_retrieval *op)
 static inline void fscache_retrieval_complete(struct fscache_retrieval *op,
 					      int n_pages)
 {
-	atomic_sub(n_pages, &op->n_pages);
-	if (atomic_read(&op->n_pages) <= 0)
+	if (atomic_sub_return_relaxed(n_pages, &op->n_pages) <= 0)
 		fscache_op_complete(&op->op, false);
 }