linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 193/207] btrfs: fix memory ordering between normal and ordered work functions

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: <20211124115710.200276952@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 24 Nov 2021 12:57:44 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Chris Murphy <lists@...orremedies.com>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        Chris Murphy <chris@...orremedies.com>,
        Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 193/207] btrfs: fix memory ordering between normal and ordered work functions

From: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>

commit 45da9c1767ac31857df572f0a909fbe88fd5a7e9 upstream.

Ordered work functions aren't guaranteed to be handled by the same thread
which executed the normal work functions. The only way execution between
normal/ordered functions is synchronized is via the WORK_DONE_BIT,
unfortunately the used bitops don't guarantee any ordering whatsoever.

This manifested as seemingly inexplicable crashes on ARM64, where
async_chunk::inode is seen as non-null in async_cow_submit which causes
submit_compressed_extents to be called and crash occurs because
async_chunk::inode suddenly became NULL. The call trace was similar to:

    pc : submit_compressed_extents+0x38/0x3d0
    lr : async_cow_submit+0x50/0xd0
    sp : ffff800015d4bc20

    <registers omitted for brevity>

    Call trace:
     submit_compressed_extents+0x38/0x3d0
     async_cow_submit+0x50/0xd0
     run_ordered_work+0xc8/0x280
     btrfs_work_helper+0x98/0x250
     process_one_work+0x1f0/0x4ac
     worker_thread+0x188/0x504
     kthread+0x110/0x114
     ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18

Fix this by adding respective barrier calls which ensure that all
accesses preceding setting of WORK_DONE_BIT are strictly ordered before
setting the flag. At the same time add a read barrier after reading of
WORK_DONE_BIT in run_ordered_work which ensures all subsequent loads
would be strictly ordered after reading the bit. This in turn ensures
are all accesses before WORK_DONE_BIT are going to be strictly ordered
before any access that can occur in ordered_func.

Reported-by: Chris Murphy <lists@...orremedies.com>
Fixes: 08a9ff326418 ("btrfs: Added btrfs_workqueue_struct implemented ordered execution based on kernel workqueue")
CC: stable@...r.kernel.org # 4.4+
Link: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2011928
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
Tested-by: Chris Murphy <chris@...orremedies.com>
Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 fs/btrfs/async-thread.c |   14 ++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)

--- a/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
@@ -283,6 +283,13 @@ static void run_ordered_work(struct __bt
 				  ordered_list);
 		if (!test_bit(WORK_DONE_BIT, &work->flags))
 			break;
+		/*
+		 * Orders all subsequent loads after reading WORK_DONE_BIT,
+		 * paired with the smp_mb__before_atomic in btrfs_work_helper
+		 * this guarantees that the ordered function will see all
+		 * updates from ordinary work function.
+		 */
+		smp_rmb();
 
 		/*
 		 * we are going to call the ordered done function, but
@@ -368,6 +375,13 @@ static void normal_work_helper(struct bt
 	thresh_exec_hook(wq);
 	work->func(work);
 	if (need_order) {
+		/*
+		 * Ensures all memory accesses done in the work function are
+		 * ordered before setting the WORK_DONE_BIT. Ensuring the thread
+		 * which is going to executed the ordered work sees them.
+		 * Pairs with the smp_rmb in run_ordered_work.
+		 */
+		smp_mb__before_atomic();
 		set_bit(WORK_DONE_BIT, &work->flags);
 		run_ordered_work(wq, work);
 	}