linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/16] ptrace: cleanups and calling do

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:   Fri, 20 May 2022 21:58:48 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, oleg@...hat.com,
        mingo@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mgorman@...e.de,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, tj@...nel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
        Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
        linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        Robert O'Callahan <roc@...nos.co>, Kyle Huey <khuey@...nos.co>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
        Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
        Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Douglas Miller <dougmill@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] ptrace: cleanups and calling do_cldstop with only
 siglock

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 02:32:24PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> writes:
> 
> > On 2022-05-18 17:49:50 [-0500], Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> 
> >> For ptrace_stop to work on PREEMT_RT no spinlocks can be taken once
> >> ptrace_freeze_traced has completed successfully.  Which fundamentally
> >> means the lock dance of dropping siglock and grabbing tasklist_lock does
> >> not work on PREEMPT_RT.  So I have worked through what is necessary so
> >> that tasklist_lock does not need to be grabbed in ptrace_stop after
> >> siglock is dropped.
> > …
> > It took me a while to realise that this is a follow-up I somehow assumed
> > that you added a few patches on top. Might have been the yesterday's
> > heat. b4 also refused to download this series because the v4 in this
> > thread looked newer… Anyway. Both series applied:
> >
> > | =============================
> > | WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> > | 5.18.0-rc7+ #16 Not tainted
> > | -----------------------------
> > | include/linux/ptrace.h:120 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> > |
> > | other info that might help us debug this:
> > |
> > | rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
> > | 2 locks held by ssdd/1734:
> > |  #0: ffff88800eaa6918 (&sighand->siglock){....}-{2:2}, at: lock_parents_siglocks+0xf0/0x3b0
> > |  #1: ffff88800eaa71d8 (&sighand->siglock/2){....}-{2:2}, at: lock_parents_siglocks+0x115/0x3b0
> > |
> > | stack backtrace:
> > | CPU: 2 PID: 1734 Comm: ssdd Not tainted 5.18.0-rc7+ #16
> > | Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.0-debian-1.16.0-4 04/01/2014
> > | Call Trace:
> > |  <TASK>
> > |  dump_stack_lvl+0x45/0x5a
> > |  unlock_parents_siglocks+0xb6/0xc0
> > |  ptrace_stop+0xb9/0x390
> > |  get_signal+0x51c/0x8d0
> > |  arch_do_signal_or_restart+0x31/0x750
> > |  exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x157/0x220
> > |  irqentry_exit_to_user_mode+0x5/0x50
> > |  asm_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x12/0x20
> >
> > That is ptrace_parent() in unlock_parents_siglocks().
> 
> How odd.  I thought I had the appropriate lockdep config options enabled
> in my test build to catch things like this.  I guess not.
> 
> Now I am trying to think how to tell it that holding the appropriate
> iglock makes this ok.

The typical annotation is something like:

	rcu_dereference_protected(foo, lockdep_is_held(&bar))

Except in this case I think the problem is that bar depends on foo in
non-trivial ways. That is, foo is 'task->parent' and bar is
'task->parent->sighand->siglock' or something.

The other option is to use rcu_dereference_raw() in this one instance
and have a comment that explains the situation.