linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.2 172/313] closures: fix a race on wakeup from closure

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,  3 Oct 2019 17:52:30 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
        Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.2 172/313] closures: fix a race on wakeup from closure_sync

From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>

[ Upstream commit a22a9602b88fabf10847f238ff81fde5f906fef7 ]

The race was when a thread using closure_sync() notices cl->s->done == 1
before the thread calling closure_put() calls wake_up_process(). Then,
it's possible for that thread to return and exit just before
wake_up_process() is called - so we're trying to wake up a process that
no longer exists.

rcu_read_lock() is sufficient to protect against this, as there's an rcu
barrier somewhere in the process teardown path.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
Acked-by: Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 drivers/md/bcache/closure.c | 10 ++++++++--
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/closure.c b/drivers/md/bcache/closure.c
index 73f5319295bc9..c12cd809ab193 100644
--- a/drivers/md/bcache/closure.c
+++ b/drivers/md/bcache/closure.c
@@ -105,8 +105,14 @@ struct closure_syncer {
 
 static void closure_sync_fn(struct closure *cl)
 {
-	cl->s->done = 1;
-	wake_up_process(cl->s->task);
+	struct closure_syncer *s = cl->s;
+	struct task_struct *p;
+
+	rcu_read_lock();
+	p = READ_ONCE(s->task);
+	s->done = 1;
+	wake_up_process(p);
+	rcu_read_unlock();
 }
 
 void __sched __closure_sync(struct closure *cl)
-- 
2.20.1