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]
Message-Id: <20210104155707.335126873@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon,  4 Jan 2021 16:57:32 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        syzbot+22e87cdf94021b984aa6@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        syzbot+c5e32344981ad9f33750@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.4 33/47] fcntl: Fix potential deadlock in send_sig{io, urg}()

From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>

commit 8d1ddb5e79374fb277985a6b3faa2ed8631c5b4c upstream.

Syzbot reports a potential deadlock found by the newly added recursive
read deadlock detection in lockdep:

[...] ========================================================
[...] WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected
[...] 5.9.0-rc2-syzkaller #0 Not tainted
[...] --------------------------------------------------------
[...] syz-executor.1/10214 just changed the state of lock:
[...] ffff88811f506338 (&f->f_owner.lock){.+..}-{2:2}, at: send_sigurg+0x1d/0x200
[...] but this lock was taken by another, HARDIRQ-safe lock in the past:
[...]  (&dev->event_lock){-...}-{2:2}
[...]
[...]
[...] and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
[...]
[...]
[...] other info that might help us debug this:
[...] Chain exists of:
[...]   &dev->event_lock --> &new->fa_lock --> &f->f_owner.lock
[...]
[...]  Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
[...]
[...]        CPU0                    CPU1
[...]        ----                    ----
[...]   lock(&f->f_owner.lock);
[...]                                local_irq_disable();
[...]                                lock(&dev->event_lock);
[...]                                lock(&new->fa_lock);
[...]   <Interrupt>
[...]     lock(&dev->event_lock);
[...]
[...]  *** DEADLOCK ***

The corresponding deadlock case is as followed:

	CPU 0		CPU 1		CPU 2
	read_lock(&fown->lock);
			spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->event_lock, ...)
					write_lock_irq(&filp->f_owner.lock); // wait for the lock
			read_lock(&fown-lock); // have to wait until the writer release
					       // due to the fairness
	<interrupted>
	spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->event_lock); // wait for the lock

The lock dependency on CPU 1 happens if there exists a call sequence:

	input_inject_event():
	  spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->event_lock,...);
	  input_handle_event():
	    input_pass_values():
	      input_to_handler():
	        handler->event(): // evdev_event()
	          evdev_pass_values():
	            spin_lock(&client->buffer_lock);
	            __pass_event():
	              kill_fasync():
	                kill_fasync_rcu():
	                  read_lock(&fa->fa_lock);
	                  send_sigio():
	                    read_lock(&fown->lock);

To fix this, make the reader in send_sigurg() and send_sigio() use
read_lock_irqsave() and read_lock_irqrestore().

Reported-by: syzbot+22e87cdf94021b984aa6@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Reported-by: syzbot+c5e32344981ad9f33750@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 fs/fcntl.c |   10 ++++++----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/fcntl.c
+++ b/fs/fcntl.c
@@ -779,9 +779,10 @@ void send_sigio(struct fown_struct *fown
 {
 	struct task_struct *p;
 	enum pid_type type;
+	unsigned long flags;
 	struct pid *pid;
 	
-	read_lock(&fown->lock);
+	read_lock_irqsave(&fown->lock, flags);
 
 	type = fown->pid_type;
 	pid = fown->pid;
@@ -802,7 +803,7 @@ void send_sigio(struct fown_struct *fown
 		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
 	}
  out_unlock_fown:
-	read_unlock(&fown->lock);
+	read_unlock_irqrestore(&fown->lock, flags);
 }
 
 static void send_sigurg_to_task(struct task_struct *p,
@@ -817,9 +818,10 @@ int send_sigurg(struct fown_struct *fown
 	struct task_struct *p;
 	enum pid_type type;
 	struct pid *pid;
+	unsigned long flags;
 	int ret = 0;
 	
-	read_lock(&fown->lock);
+	read_lock_irqsave(&fown->lock, flags);
 
 	type = fown->pid_type;
 	pid = fown->pid;
@@ -842,7 +844,7 @@ int send_sigurg(struct fown_struct *fown
 		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
 	}
  out_unlock_fown:
-	read_unlock(&fown->lock);
+	read_unlock_irqrestore(&fown->lock, flags);
 	return ret;
 }
 


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ