linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] sched: prctl() and cgroup interaction

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: <CABk29NvYfAAREeBV-gcoQa+LijphCUJXqeJLWjgPr_PTYumUMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Apr 2021 18:30:48 -0700
From:   Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        "Hyser,Chris" <chris.hyser@...cle.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] sched: prctl() and cgroup interaction

Hi Peter,

I walked through the reference counting, and it seems good to me
(though it did take a few passes to fully digest the invariants for
the fat cookie stuff).

> +unsigned long sched_core_alloc_cookie(unsigned int type)
>  {
>         struct sched_core_cookie *ck = kmalloc(sizeof(*ck), GFP_KERNEL);
>         if (!ck)
>                 return 0;
> -       refcount_set(&ck->refcnt, 1);
> +       WARN_ON_ONCE(type > GROUP_COOKIE);
> +       sched_core_init_cookie(ck, type);
>         sched_core_get();
>
> -       return (unsigned long)ck;
> +       return (unsigned long)ck | type;
 > }

This feels like it needs to be stronger than a WARN_ON_ONCE; could
create a corrupted address that we later try to kfree().

Also, for my own edification, why will the bottom two bits here always be 0?

> -unsigned long sched_core_alloc_cookie(void)
> +static inline void *cookie_ptr(unsigned long cookie)
> +{
> +       return (void *)(cookie & ~3UL);
> +}
> +
> +static inline int cookie_type(unsigned long cookie)
> +{
> +       return cookie & 3;
> +}

s/3/FAT_COOKIE

> +#define FAT_COOKIE     0x03

Move to sched.h to group with TASK/GROUP_COOKIE?

> +static unsigned long __sched_core_fat_cookie(struct task_struct *p,
> +                                            void **spare_fat,
> +                                            unsigned long cookie)
> +{

This function looks good to me, but could use some more comments about
the pre/post-condition assumptions. Ie. cookie already has a get()
associated with it, caller is expected to kfree the spare_fat.

> +       raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&fat_lock, flags);
> +       n = rb_find_add(&fat->node, &fat_root, fat_cmp);
> +       raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&fat_lock, flags);
> +
> +       if (n) {
> +               sched_core_put_fat(fat);
> +               fat = node_2_fat(n);

This put() doesn't seem strictly necessary; caller will be
unconditionally freeing the spare_fat. Keep anyway for completeness,
but add a comment?