Message-ID: <20210329225042.GF429942@xz-x1>
Date:   Mon, 29 Mar 2021 18:50:42 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>
Cc:     Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@...com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Wang Qing <wangqing@...o.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>,
        Cannon Matthews <cannonmatthews@...gle.com>,
        "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
        Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
        Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] userfaultfd/shmem: fix MCOPY_ATOMIC_CONTNUE behavior

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 01:06:59PM -0700, Axel Rasmussen wrote:
> Previously, we shared too much of the code with COPY and ZEROPAGE, so we
> manipulated things in various invalid ways:
> 
> - Previously, we unconditionally called shmem_inode_acct_block. In the
>   continue case, we're looking up an existing page which would have been
>   accounted for properly when it was allocated. So doing it twice
>   results in double-counting, and eventually leaking.
> 
> - Previously, we made the pte writable whenever the VMA was writable.
>   However, for continue, consider this case:
> 
>   1. A tmpfs file was created
>   2. The non-UFFD-registered side mmap()-s with MAP_SHARED
>   3. The UFFD-registered side mmap()-s with MAP_PRIVATE
> 
>   In this case, even though the UFFD-registered VMA may be writable, we
>   still want CoW behavior. So, check for this case and don't make the
>   pte writable.
> 
> - The offset / max_off checking doesn't necessarily hurt anything, but
>   it's not needed in the CONTINUE case, so skip it.
> 
> - Previously, we unconditionally called ClearPageDirty() in the error
>   path. In the continue case though, since this is an existing page, it
>   might have already been dirty before we started touching it. So,
>   remember whether or not it was dirty before we set_page_dirty(), and
>   only clear the bit if it wasn't dirty before.
> 
> - Previously, we unconditionally removed the page from the page cache in
>   the error path. But in the continue case, we didn't add it - it was
>   already there because the page is present in some second
>   (non-UFFD-registered) mapping. So, removing it is invalid.
> 
> Because the error handling issues are easy to exercise in the selftest,
> make a small modification there to do so.
> 
> Finally, refactor shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte a bit. By this point, we've
> added a lot of "if (!is_continue)"-s everywhere. It's cleaner to just
> check for that mode first thing, and then "goto" down to where the parts
> we actually want are. This leaves the code in between cleaner.
> 
> Changes since v1:
> - Refactor to skip ahead with goto, instead of adding several more
>   "if (!is_continue)".
> - Fix unconditional ClearPageDirty().
> - Don't pte_mkwrite() when is_continue && !VM_SHARED.
> 
> Fixes: 00da60b9d0a0 ("userfaultfd: support minor fault handling for shmem")
> Signed-off-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>
> ---
>  mm/shmem.c                               | 67 ++++++++++++++----------
>  tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 12 +++++
>  2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
> index d2e0e81b7d2e..8ab1f1f29987 100644
> --- a/mm/shmem.c
> +++ b/mm/shmem.c
> @@ -2378,17 +2378,22 @@ int shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, pmd_t *dst_pmd,
>  	pte_t _dst_pte, *dst_pte;
>  	int ret;
>  	pgoff_t offset, max_off;
> -
> -	ret = -ENOMEM;
> -	if (!shmem_inode_acct_block(inode, 1))
> -		goto out;
> +	int writable;
> +	bool was_dirty;
>  
>  	if (is_continue) {
>  		ret = -EFAULT;
>  		page = find_lock_page(mapping, pgoff);
>  		if (!page)
> -			goto out_unacct_blocks;
> -	} else if (!*pagep) {
> +			goto out;
> +		goto install_ptes;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = -ENOMEM;
> +	if (!shmem_inode_acct_block(inode, 1))
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	if (!*pagep) {
>  		page = shmem_alloc_page(gfp, info, pgoff);
>  		if (!page)
>  			goto out_unacct_blocks;
> @@ -2415,13 +2420,11 @@ int shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, pmd_t *dst_pmd,
>  		*pagep = NULL;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (!is_continue) {
> -		VM_BUG_ON(PageSwapBacked(page));
> -		VM_BUG_ON(PageLocked(page));
> -		__SetPageLocked(page);
> -		__SetPageSwapBacked(page);
> -		__SetPageUptodate(page);
> -	}
> +	VM_BUG_ON(PageSwapBacked(page));
> +	VM_BUG_ON(PageLocked(page));
> +	__SetPageLocked(page);
> +	__SetPageSwapBacked(page);
> +	__SetPageUptodate(page);
>  
>  	ret = -EFAULT;
>  	offset = linear_page_index(dst_vma, dst_addr);
> @@ -2429,16 +2432,18 @@ int shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, pmd_t *dst_pmd,
>  	if (unlikely(offset >= max_off))
>  		goto out_release;
>  
> -	/* If page wasn't already in the page cache, add it. */
> -	if (!is_continue) {
> -		ret = shmem_add_to_page_cache(page, mapping, pgoff, NULL,
> -					      gfp & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK, dst_mm);
> -		if (ret)
> -			goto out_release;
> -	}
> +	ret = shmem_add_to_page_cache(page, mapping, pgoff, NULL,
> +				      gfp & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK, dst_mm);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto out_release;
>  
> +install_ptes:
>  	_dst_pte = mk_pte(page, dst_vma->vm_page_prot);
> -	if (dst_vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE)
> +	/* For CONTINUE on a non-shared VMA, don't pte_mkwrite for CoW. */
> +	writable = is_continue && !(dst_vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED)
> +		? 0
> +		: dst_vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE;
> +	if (writable)
>  		_dst_pte = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(_dst_pte));
>  	else {
>  		/*
> @@ -2448,15 +2453,18 @@ int shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, pmd_t *dst_pmd,
>  		 * unconditionally before unlock_page(), but doing it
>  		 * only if VM_WRITE is not set is faster.
>  		 */
> +		was_dirty = PageDirty(page);
>  		set_page_dirty(page);
>  	}
>  
>  	dst_pte = pte_offset_map_lock(dst_mm, dst_pmd, dst_addr, &ptl);
>  
> -	ret = -EFAULT;
> -	max_off = DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(inode), PAGE_SIZE);
> -	if (unlikely(offset >= max_off))
> -		goto out_release_unlock;
> +	if (!is_continue) {
> +		ret = -EFAULT;
> +		max_off = DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(inode), PAGE_SIZE);
> +		if (unlikely(offset >= max_off))
> +			goto out_release_unlock;
> +	}

I think you're right, but I won't touch this code explicitly since the new code
slightly affects readability, while skipping it won't save a lot of cpu cycles.
No strong opinion though.

>  
>  	ret = -EEXIST;
>  	if (!pte_none(*dst_pte))
> @@ -2485,13 +2493,16 @@ int shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, pmd_t *dst_pmd,
>  	return ret;
>  out_release_unlock:
>  	pte_unmap_unlock(dst_pte, ptl);
> -	ClearPageDirty(page);
> -	delete_from_page_cache(page);
> +	if (!was_dirty)
> +		ClearPageDirty(page);

It could be using a random was_dirty from stack, does not seem right.

Maybe simply drop this ClearPageDirty()?  I'm not sure whether the page free
code will complain, but if not I think an extra dirty bit is better than losing
one, as the latter corrupts data while the former happens anyways, not to
mention this is an error path.  Maybe acceptable?

> +	if (!is_continue)
> +		delete_from_page_cache(page);
>  out_release:
>  	unlock_page(page);
>  	put_page(page);
>  out_unacct_blocks:
> -	shmem_inode_unacct_blocks(inode, 1);
> +	if (!is_continue)
> +		shmem_inode_unacct_blocks(inode, 1);
>  	goto out;
>  }
>  #endif /* CONFIG_USERFAULTFD */
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
> index f6c86b036d0f..d8541a59dae5 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
> @@ -485,6 +485,7 @@ static void wp_range(int ufd, __u64 start, __u64 len, bool wp)
>  static void continue_range(int ufd, __u64 start, __u64 len)
>  {
>  	struct uffdio_continue req;
> +	int ret;
>  
>  	req.range.start = start;
>  	req.range.len = len;
> @@ -493,6 +494,17 @@ static void continue_range(int ufd, __u64 start, __u64 len)
>  	if (ioctl(ufd, UFFDIO_CONTINUE, &req))
>  		err("UFFDIO_CONTINUE failed for address 0x%" PRIx64,
>  		    (uint64_t)start);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Error handling within the kernel for continue is subtly different
> +	 * from copy or zeropage, so it may be a source of bugs. Trigger an
> +	 * error (-EEXIST) on purpose, to verify doing so doesn't cause a BUG.
> +	 */
> +	req.mapped = 0;
> +	ret = ioctl(ufd, UFFDIO_CONTINUE, &req);
> +	if (ret >= 0 || req.mapped != -EEXIST)
> +		err("failed to exercise UFFDIO_CONTINUE error handling, ret=%d, mapped=%" PRId64,
> +		    ret, req.mapped);
>  }
>  
>  static void *locking_thread(void *arg)
> -- 
> 2.31.0.291.g576ba9dcdaf-goog
> 

-- 
Peter Xu

Powered by blists - more mailing lists