linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/slub: fix the race between validate_slab and slab

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, 3 Jun 2022 11:35:30 +0800
From:   Rongwei Wang <rongwei.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.de>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, songmuchun@...edance.com,
        Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
        roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
        penberg@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/slub: fix the race between validate_slab and
 slab_free

Hi, Christoph, David, Muchun and Hyeonggon

Thanks for your time.

Recently, I am also find other ways to solve this. That case was 
provided by Muchun is useful (Thanks Muchun!). Indeed, it seems that use 
n->list_lock here is unwise. Actually, I'm not sure if you recognize the 
existence of such race? If all agrees this race, then the next question 
may be: do we want to solve this problem? or as David said, it would be 
better to deprecate validate attribute directly. I have no idea about 
it, hope to rely on your experience.

In fact, I mainly want to collect your views on whether or how to fix 
this bug here. Thanks!

Thanks again for your time:).
-wrw

On 6/2/22 11:14 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 30 May 2022, David Rientjes wrote:
> 
>>> Unconditionally taking n->list_lock will degrade performance.
>>
>> This is a good point, it would be useful to gather some benchmarks for
>> workloads that are known to thrash some caches and would hit this path
>> such as netperf TCP_RR.
> 
> Its obvious that adding new spinlocks to some of the hottest functions in
> the kernel will degrade performance. This goes against the basic design of
> these functions to be as efficient as possible.