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:   Mon, 2 Aug 2021 02:16:14 +0200
From:   Luigi Rizzo <lrizzo@...gle.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add mmap_assert_locked() annotations to find_vma*()

(repost in plain text)

On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 9:33 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2021 10:53:41 -0700 Luigi Rizzo <lrizzo@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > find_vma() and variants need protection when used.
> > This patch adds mmap_assert_lock() calls in the functions.
> >
> > To make sure the invariant is satisfied, we also need to add a
> > mmap_read_loc() around the get_user_pages_remote() call in
> > get_arg_page(). The lock is not strictly necessary because the mm
> > has been newly created, but the extra cost is limited because
> > the same mutex was also acquired shortly before in __bprm_mm_init(),
> > so it is hot and uncontended.
> >
>
> Well, it isn't cost-free.  find_vma() is called a lot and a surprising
> number of systems apparently run with CONFIG_DEBUG_VM.  Why do you
> think this cost is justified?

I assume you are concerned with the cost of mmap_assert_locked() ?

I'd say the justification is the same as for all asserts:
at some point some code change may miss the required lock, and the
asserts are there to catch elusive race conditions,

There are in fact already instances of mmap_locked_assert()
right before find_vma() in walk_page_range(), and a couple before
calls to __get_user_pages().

As for the cost, I'd think that if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is set,
one does it on purpose to catch errors and is prepared to pay
the cost (in this case the atomic_read(counter) in rwsem_is_locked(),
the counter should be hot).

FWIW I have instrumented find_vma() on a fast machine using kstats

   https://github.com/luigirizzo/lr-cstats

(load the module then enable the trace with
  echo "trace pcpu:find_vma bits 3" > /sys/kernel/debug/kstats/_control
and monitor the time with
  watch "grep CPUS /sys/kernel/debug/kstats/find_vma"

I didn't run anything especially intensive except some network
benchmarks, but I have collected ~2M samples with the following
distribution of find_vma() time in nanoseconds in 3 configs:

CONFIGURATION         p10   p50   p90   p95   p98

no-debug               89   109   214   332    605
debug                 331   369   603   862   1338
debug+this patch      337   369   603   863   1339

As you can see, just compiling a debug kernel, even without this patch,
makes the function 3x more expensive. The effect of this patch is
not measurable (the differences are below measurement error).

cheers
luigi

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ