[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9b8346c8-c3b8-b0bd-b925-9545aa3482f9@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:19:35 +0800
From: Zefan Li <lizefan@...wei.com>
To: Chenweilong <chenweilong@...wei.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
CC: "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"dvyukov@...gle.com" <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] kernel/fork.c: annotate data races for
copy_process
On 2020/6/17 17:08, Chenweilong wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 11:08:01AM +0800, Weilong Chen wrote:
>>> The check is only there to stop root fork bombs.
>>>
>>> BUG: KCSAN: data-race in copy_process / copy_process
>>>
>>> write to 0xffffffff86f87d20 of 4 bytes by task 7121 on cpu 5:
>>> copy_process+0x2e1a/0x3af0 kernel/fork.c:2285
>>> _do_fork+0xf7/0x790 kernel/fork.c:2430
>>> __do_sys_clone+0xf9/0x130 kernel/fork.c:2585 __se_sys_clone
>>> kernel/fork.c:2566 [inline]
>>> __x64_sys_clone+0x6c/0x80 kernel/fork.c:2566
>>> do_syscall_64+0xc7/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:295
>>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>>>
>>> read to 0xffffffff86f87d20 of 4 bytes by task 7125 on cpu 3:
>>> copy_process+0x9eb/0x3af0 kernel/fork.c:1967
>>> _do_fork+0xf7/0x790 kernel/fork.c:2430
>>> __do_sys_clone+0xf9/0x130 kernel/fork.c:2585 __se_sys_clone
>>> kernel/fork.c:2566 [inline]
>>> __x64_sys_clone+0x6c/0x80 kernel/fork.c:2566
>>> do_syscall_64+0xc7/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:295
>>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Weilong Chen <chenweilong@...wei.com>
>>
>> Plumbing data_race() in there just to taper over this seems ugly.
>> Before we do that we should probably simply make nr_threads atomic_t.
> Will using atomic_t cause performance degradation ? I don’t know why atomic was not used in the beginning.
>
>> Also, where's the link to the syzbot/kcsan report? Or did you get this report from somewhere else?
> I got this from local test.
There is a comment just above the if statement to explain this race:
/*
* If multiple threads are within copy_process(), then this check
* triggers too late. This doesn't hurt, the check is only there
* to stop root fork bombs.
*/
This race won't go away by making nr_threads atomic, because I think it is
tasklist_lock that protects nr_thread.
Adding data_race() here I think makes the code more readable, as a supplementary
to the code comment.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists