linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] tools/memory-model: Fix data race detection for unordered store and load

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:   Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:39:59 +0200
From:   Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
To:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:     LKMM Maintainers -- Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tools/memory-model: Fix data race detection for
 unordered store and load

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 04:57:22PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> Currently the Linux Kernel Memory Model gives an incorrect response
> for the following litmus test:
> 
> C plain-WWC
> 
> {}
> 
> P0(int *x)
> {
> 	WRITE_ONCE(*x, 2);
> }
> 
> P1(int *x, int *y)
> {
> 	int r1;
> 	int r2;
> 	int r3;
> 
> 	r1 = READ_ONCE(*x);
> 	if (r1 == 2) {
> 		smp_rmb();
> 		r2 = *x;
> 	}
> 	smp_rmb();
> 	r3 = READ_ONCE(*x);
> 	WRITE_ONCE(*y, r3 - 1);
> }
> 
> P2(int *x, int *y)
> {
> 	int r4;
> 
> 	r4 = READ_ONCE(*y);
> 	if (r4 > 0)
> 		WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
> }
> 
> exists (x=2 /\ 1:r2=2 /\ 2:r4=1)
> 
> The memory model says that the plain read of *x in P1 races with the
> WRITE_ONCE(*x) in P2.
> 
> The problem is that we have a write W and a read R related by neither
> fre or rfe, but rather W ->coe W' ->rfe R, where W' is an intermediate
> write (the WRITE_ONCE() in P0).  In this situation there is no
> particular ordering between W and R, so either a wr-vis link from W to
> R or an rw-xbstar link from R to W would prove that the accesses
> aren't concurrent.
> 
> But the LKMM only looks for a wr-vis link, which is equivalent to
> assuming that W must execute before R.  This is not necessarily true
> on non-multicopy-atomic systems, as the WWC pattern demonstrates.
> 
> This patch changes the LKMM to accept either a wr-vis or a reverse
> rw-xbstar link as a proof of non-concurrency.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>

Acked-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>

Thanks,
  Andrea


> 
> ---
> 
>  tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> Index: usb-devel/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat
> ===================================================================
> --- usb-devel.orig/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat
> +++ usb-devel/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat
> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ empty (wr-incoh | rw-incoh | ww-incoh) a
>  (* Actual races *)
>  let ww-nonrace = ww-vis & ((Marked * W) | rw-xbstar) & ((W * Marked) | wr-vis)
>  let ww-race = (pre-race & co) \ ww-nonrace
> -let wr-race = (pre-race & (co? ; rf)) \ wr-vis
> +let wr-race = (pre-race & (co? ; rf)) \ wr-vis \ rw-xbstar^-1
>  let rw-race = (pre-race & fr) \ rw-xbstar
>  
>  flag ~empty (ww-race | wr-race | rw-race) as data-race
>