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:   Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:53:34 +0100
From:   Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To:     Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        borntraeger@...ibm.com, kwankhede@...dia.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        alex.williamson@...hat.com, pasic@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] s390/vfio-ap: fix circular lockdep when
 setting/clearing crypto masks

On Tue,  9 Feb 2021 14:48:30 -0500
Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> This patch fixes a circular locking dependency in the CI introduced by
> commit f21916ec4826 ("s390/vfio-ap: clean up vfio_ap resources when KVM
> pointer invalidated"). The lockdep only occurs when starting a Secure
> Execution guest. Crypto virtualization (vfio_ap) is not yet supported for
> SE guests; however, in order to avoid CI errors, this fix is being
> provided.
> 
> The circular lockdep was introduced when the masks in the guest's APCB
> were taken under the matrix_dev->lock. While the lock is definitely
> needed to protect the setting/unsetting of the KVM pointer, it is not
> necessarily critical for setting the masks, so this will not be done under
> protection of the matrix_dev->lock.
> 
> Fixes: f21916ec4826 ("s390/vfio-ap: clean up vfio_ap resources when KVM pointer invalidated")
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> 

>  static void vfio_ap_mdev_unset_kvm(struct ap_matrix_mdev *matrix_mdev)
>  {
> -	kvm_arch_crypto_clear_masks(matrix_mdev->kvm);
> -	matrix_mdev->kvm->arch.crypto.pqap_hook = NULL;
> -	vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queues(matrix_mdev->mdev);
> -	kvm_put_kvm(matrix_mdev->kvm);
> -	matrix_mdev->kvm = NULL;
> +	if (matrix_mdev->kvm) {

If you're doing setting/unsetting under matrix_dev->lock, is it
possible that matrix_mdev->kvm gets unset between here and the next
line, as you don't hold the lock?

Maybe you could
- grab a reference to kvm while holding the lock
- call the mask handling functions with that kvm reference
- lock again, drop the reference, and do the rest of the processing?

> +		kvm_arch_crypto_clear_masks(matrix_mdev->kvm);
> +		mutex_lock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> +		matrix_mdev->kvm->arch.crypto.pqap_hook = NULL;
> +		vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queues(matrix_mdev->mdev);
> +		kvm_put_kvm(matrix_mdev->kvm);
> +		matrix_mdev->kvm = NULL;
> +		mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> +	}
>  }

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ