| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20200317180657.GK3199@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 11:06:57 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jgg@...pe.ca, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mmu_notifier: silence PROVE_RCU_LIST warnings
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:56:40PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> It is safe to traverse mm->notifier_subscriptions->list either under
> SRCU read lock or mm->notifier_subscriptions->lock using
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(). Silence the PROVE_RCU_LIST false positives,
> for example,
>
> WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> -----------------------------
> mm/mmu_notifier.c:484 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
> 3 locks held by libvirtd/802:
> #0: ffff9321e3f58148 (&mm->mmap_sem#2){++++}, at: do_mprotect_pkey+0xe1/0x3e0
> #1: ffffffff91ae6160 (mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start){+.+.}, at: change_p4d_range+0x5fa/0x800
> #2: ffffffff91ae6e08 (srcu){....}, at: __mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start+0x178/0x460
>
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 7 PID: 802 Comm: libvirtd Tainted: G I 5.6.0-rc6-next-20200317+ #2
> Hardware name: HP ProLiant BL460c Gen8, BIOS I31 11/02/2014
> Call Trace:
> dump_stack+0xa4/0xfe
> lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xeb/0xf5
> __mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start+0x3ff/0x460
> change_p4d_range+0x746/0x800
> change_protection+0x1df/0x300
> mprotect_fixup+0x245/0x3e0
> do_mprotect_pkey+0x23b/0x3e0
> __x64_sys_mprotect+0x51/0x70
> do_syscall_64+0x91/0xae8
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xb3
>
> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
>From an RCU perspective:
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> ---
> mm/mmu_notifier.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mmu_notifier.c b/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> index ef3973a5d34a..06852b896fa6 100644
> --- a/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> +++ b/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> @@ -307,7 +307,8 @@ static void mn_hlist_release(struct mmu_notifier_subscriptions *subscriptions,
> * ->release returns.
> */
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> - hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription, &subscriptions->list, hlist)
> + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription, &subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu))
> /*
> * If ->release runs before mmu_notifier_unregister it must be
> * handled, as it's the only way for the driver to flush all
> @@ -370,7 +371,8 @@ int __mmu_notifier_clear_flush_young(struct mm_struct *mm,
>
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription,
> - &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu)) {
> if (subscription->ops->clear_flush_young)
> young |= subscription->ops->clear_flush_young(
> subscription, mm, start, end);
> @@ -389,7 +391,8 @@ int __mmu_notifier_clear_young(struct mm_struct *mm,
>
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription,
> - &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu)) {
> if (subscription->ops->clear_young)
> young |= subscription->ops->clear_young(subscription,
> mm, start, end);
> @@ -407,7 +410,8 @@ int __mmu_notifier_test_young(struct mm_struct *mm,
>
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription,
> - &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu)) {
> if (subscription->ops->test_young) {
> young = subscription->ops->test_young(subscription, mm,
> address);
> @@ -428,7 +432,8 @@ void __mmu_notifier_change_pte(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long address,
>
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription,
> - &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu)) {
> if (subscription->ops->change_pte)
> subscription->ops->change_pte(subscription, mm, address,
> pte);
> @@ -476,7 +481,8 @@ static int mn_hlist_invalidate_range_start(
> int id;
>
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> - hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription, &subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription, &subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu)) {
> const struct mmu_notifier_ops *ops = subscription->ops;
>
> if (ops->invalidate_range_start) {
> @@ -528,7 +534,8 @@ mn_hlist_invalidate_end(struct mmu_notifier_subscriptions *subscriptions,
> int id;
>
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> - hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription, &subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription, &subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu)) {
> /*
> * Call invalidate_range here too to avoid the need for the
> * subsystem of having to register an invalidate_range_end
> @@ -582,7 +589,8 @@ void __mmu_notifier_invalidate_range(struct mm_struct *mm,
>
> id = srcu_read_lock(&srcu);
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription,
> - &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + srcu_read_lock_held(&srcu)) {
> if (subscription->ops->invalidate_range)
> subscription->ops->invalidate_range(subscription, mm,
> start, end);
> @@ -714,7 +722,8 @@ find_get_mmu_notifier(struct mm_struct *mm, const struct mmu_notifier_ops *ops)
>
> spin_lock(&mm->notifier_subscriptions->lock);
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(subscription,
> - &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist) {
> + &mm->notifier_subscriptions->list, hlist,
> + lockdep_is_held(&mm->notifier_subscriptions->lock)) {
> if (subscription->ops != ops)
> continue;
>
> --
> 2.21.0 (Apple Git-122.2)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists