linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] rcu/tree: Add support for debug_objects debugging for kfree

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: <20190828215751.GB26530@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:57:51 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, byungchul.park@....com,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        rcu@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] rcu/tree: Add support for debug_objects debugging
 for kfree_rcu()

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:43:20PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 02:31:19PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:01:57PM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > > Make use of RCU's debug_objects debugging support
> > > (CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD) similar to call_rcu() and other flavors.
> > 
> > Other flavors?  Ah, call_srcu(), rcu_barrier(), and srcu_barrier(),
> > right?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > > We queue the object during the kfree_rcu() call and dequeue it during
> > > reclaim.
> > > 
> > > Tested that enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD successfully detects
> > > double kfree_rcu() calls.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> > 
> > The code looks good!
> 
> thanks, does that mean you'll ack/apply it? :-P

Is it independent of 1/5 and 2/5?

							Thanx, Paul

>  - Joel
> 
> > 
> > 							Thanx, Paul
> > 
> > > ---
> > >  kernel/rcu/tree.c | 8 ++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > index 9b9ae4db1c2d..64568f12641d 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > @@ -2757,6 +2757,7 @@ static void kfree_rcu_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > >  	for (; head; head = next) {
> > >  		next = head->next;
> > >  		/* Could be possible to optimize with kfree_bulk in future */
> > > +		debug_rcu_head_unqueue(head);
> > >  		__rcu_reclaim(rcu_state.name, head);
> > >  		cond_resched_tasks_rcu_qs();
> > >  	}
> > > @@ -2868,6 +2869,13 @@ void kfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func)
> > >  	if (rcu_scheduler_active != RCU_SCHEDULER_RUNNING)
> > >  		return kfree_call_rcu_nobatch(head, func);
> > >  
> > > +	if (debug_rcu_head_queue(head)) {
> > > +		/* Probable double kfree_rcu() */
> > > +		WARN_ONCE(1, "kfree_call_rcu(): Double-freed call. rcu_head %p\n",
> > > +			  head);
> > > +		return;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > >  	head->func = func;
> > >  
> > >  	local_irq_save(flags);	/* For safely calling this_cpu_ptr(). */
> > > -- 
> > > 2.23.0.187.g17f5b7556c-goog
> > >