linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/migration: reduce the rcu lock duration

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: <3cf42a6e-c13d-341d-00a0-876a61794273@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 May 2022 11:14:30 +0800
From:   Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
CC:     <ying.huang@...el.com>, <hch@....de>, <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        <cl@...ux.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, <naoya.horiguchi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/migration: reduce the rcu lock duration

On 2022/4/29 17:54, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 25.04.22 15:27, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> rcu_read_lock is required by grabbing the task refcount but it's not
>> needed for ptrace_may_access. So we could release the rcu lock after
>> task refcount is successfully grabbed to reduce the rcu holding time.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
>> Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
>> Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
>> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
>> ---
>>  mm/migrate.c | 3 +--
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
>> index b2678279eb43..b779646665fe 100644
>> --- a/mm/migrate.c
>> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
>> @@ -1902,17 +1902,16 @@ static struct mm_struct *find_mm_struct(pid_t pid, nodemask_t *mem_nodes)
>>  		return ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
>>  	}
>>  	get_task_struct(task);
>> +	rcu_read_unlock();
>>  
>>  	/*
>>  	 * Check if this process has the right to modify the specified
>>  	 * process. Use the regular "ptrace_may_access()" checks.
>>  	 */
>>  	if (!ptrace_may_access(task, PTRACE_MODE_READ_REALCREDS)) {
>> -		rcu_read_unlock();
>>  		mm = ERR_PTR(-EPERM);
>>  		goto out;
>>  	}
>> -	rcu_read_unlock();
>>  
>>  	mm = ERR_PTR(security_task_movememory(task));
>>  	if (IS_ERR(mm))
> 
> Similar pattern in:
> 
> mm/mempolicy.c:kernel_migrate_pages()
> kernel/futex/syscalls.c:get_robust_list()
> kernel/nsproxy.c:validate_nsset()
> 
> Exception:
> 
> sched/core_sched.c:sched_core_share_pid()
> 
> 
> Should we unify -- i.e., adjust the remaining 3 as well?
> 

Sorry for late respond. I think it's fine to do all of this together. But this patch is indeed
under verifying now. I will try to do that after verified. Thanks!