linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] arch_topology: Avoid use-after-free for scale_freq

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: <20210616081859.idzpwzdyeu666xpz@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Wed, 16 Jun 2021 13:48:59 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Qian Cai <quic_qiancai@...cinc.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] arch_topology: Avoid use-after-free for
 scale_freq_data

On 16-06-21, 09:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 12:18:08PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Currently topology_scale_freq_tick() may end up using a pointer to
> > struct scale_freq_data, which was previously cleared by
> > topology_clear_scale_freq_source(), as there is no protection in place
> > here. The users of topology_clear_scale_freq_source() though needs a
> > guarantee that the previous scale_freq_data isn't used anymore.
> > 
> > Since topology_scale_freq_tick() is called from scheduler tick, we don't
> > want to add locking in there. Use the RCU update mechanism instead
> > (which is already used by the scheduler's utilization update path) to
> > guarantee race free updates here.
> > 
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> 
> So this is a bugfix for problems in the current codebase?  What commit
> does this fix?  Should it go to the stable kernels?

There is only one user of topology_clear_scale_freq_source()
(cppc-cpufreq driver, which is already reverted in pm/linux-next). So
in the upcoming 5.13 kernel release, there will be no one using this
API and so no one will break.

And so I skipped the fixes tag, I can add it though.

> > ---
> >  drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------
> >  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > index c1179edc0f3b..921312a8d957 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > @@ -18,10 +18,11 @@
> >  #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> >  #include <linux/init.h>
> >  #include <linux/percpu.h>
> > +#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
> >  #include <linux/sched.h>
> >  #include <linux/smp.h>
> >  
> > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct scale_freq_data *, sft_data);
> > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct scale_freq_data __rcu *, sft_data);
> >  static struct cpumask scale_freq_counters_mask;
> >  static bool scale_freq_invariant;
> >  
> > @@ -66,16 +67,20 @@ void topology_set_scale_freq_source(struct scale_freq_data *data,
> >  	if (cpumask_empty(&scale_freq_counters_mask))
> >  		scale_freq_invariant = topology_scale_freq_invariant();
> >  
> > +	rcu_read_lock();
> > +
> >  	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
> > -		sfd = per_cpu(sft_data, cpu);
> > +		sfd = rcu_dereference(*per_cpu_ptr(&sft_data, cpu));
> >  
> >  		/* Use ARCH provided counters whenever possible */
> >  		if (!sfd || sfd->source != SCALE_FREQ_SOURCE_ARCH) {
> > -			per_cpu(sft_data, cpu) = data;
> > +			rcu_assign_pointer(per_cpu(sft_data, cpu), data);
> >  			cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &scale_freq_counters_mask);
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	rcu_read_unlock();
> > +
> >  	update_scale_freq_invariant(true);
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(topology_set_scale_freq_source);
> > @@ -86,22 +91,32 @@ void topology_clear_scale_freq_source(enum scale_freq_source source,
> >  	struct scale_freq_data *sfd;
> >  	int cpu;
> >  
> > +	rcu_read_lock();
> > +
> >  	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
> > -		sfd = per_cpu(sft_data, cpu);
> > +		sfd = rcu_dereference(*per_cpu_ptr(&sft_data, cpu));
> >  
> >  		if (sfd && sfd->source == source) {
> > -			per_cpu(sft_data, cpu) = NULL;
> > +			rcu_assign_pointer(per_cpu(sft_data, cpu), NULL);
> >  			cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &scale_freq_counters_mask);
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	rcu_read_unlock();
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Make sure all references to previous sft_data are dropped to avoid
> > +	 * use-after-free races.
> > +	 */
> > +	synchronize_rcu();
> 
> What race is happening?  How could the current code race?  Only when a
> cpu is removed?

topology_scale_freq_tick() is called by the scheduler for each CPU
from scheduler_tick().

It is possible that topology_scale_freq_tick() ends up using an older
copy of sft_data pointer, while it is being removed by
topology_clear_scale_freq_source() because a CPU went away or a
cpufreq driver went away, or during normal suspend/resume (where CPUs
are hot-unplugged).

synchronize_rcu() makes sure that all RCU critical sections that
started before it is called, will finish before it returns. And so the
callers of topology_clear_scale_freq_source() don't need to worry
about their callback getting called anymore.

-- 
viresh