linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

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]

Date:   Thu, 9 May 2019 17:56:46 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@...neltoast.com>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
        Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:ANDROID DRIVERS" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

On 05/07, Sultan Alsawaf wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 05:31:54PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > Did you test this patch with lockdep enabled?
> >
> > If I read the patch correctly, lockdep should complain. vtsk_is_duplicate()
> > ensures that we do not take the same ->alloc_lock twice or more, but lockdep
> > can't know this.
>
> Yeah, lockdep is fine with this, at least on 4.4.

Impossible ;) I bet lockdep should report the deadlock as soon as find_victims()
calls find_lock_task_mm() when you already have a locked victim.

Nevermind, I guess this code won't run with lockdep enabled...

As for https://github.com/kerneltoast/android_kernel_google_wahoo/commit/afc8c9bf2dbde95941253c168d1adb64cfa2e3ad
Well,

	mmdrop(mm);
	simple_lmk_mm_freed(mm);

looks racy because mmdrop(mm) can free this mm_struct. Yes, simple_lmk_mm_freed()
does not dereference this pointer, but the same memory can be re-allocated as
another ->mm for the new task which can be found by find_victims(), and _in theory_
this all can happen in between, so the "victims[i].mm == mm" can be false positive.

And this also means that simple_lmk_mm_freed() should clear victims[i].mm when
it detects "victims[i].mm == mm", otherwise we have the same theoretical race,
victims_to_kill is only cleared when the last victim goes away.

Another nit... you can drop tasklist_lock right after the 1st "find_victims" loop.

And it seems that you do not really need to walk the "victims" array twice after that,
you can do everything in a single loop, but this is cosmetic.

Oleg.