linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] [RFC] block: fix null-deref in percpu_ref

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: <YuPBpn0jIEy65T6P@kroah.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:16:54 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Zhang Wensheng <zhangwensheng@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        yukuai3@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] [RFC] block: fix null-deref in percpu_ref_put

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 06:50:36PM +0800, Zhang Wensheng wrote:
> From: Zhang Wensheng <zhangwensheng5@...wei.com>
> 
> A problem was find in stable 5.10 and the root cause of it like below.

5.10 is very old, is this still an issue in Linus's tree?

> 
> In the use of q_usage_counter of request_queue, blk_cleanup_queue using
> "wait_event(q->mq_freeze_wq, percpu_ref_is_zero(&q->q_usage_counter))"
> to wait q_usage_counter becoming zero. however, if the q_usage_counter
> becoming zero quickly, and percpu_ref_exit will execute and ref->data
> will be freed, maybe another process will cause a null-defef problem
> like below:
> 
> 	CPU0                             CPU1
> blk_cleanup_queue
>  blk_freeze_queue
>   blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait
> 				scsi_end_request
> 				 percpu_ref_get
> 				 ...
> 				 percpu_ref_put
> 				  atomic_long_sub_and_test
>   percpu_ref_exit
>    ref->data -> NULL
>    				   ref->data->release(ref) -> null-deref
> 
> Fix it by setting flag(QUEUE_FLAG_USAGE_COUNT_SYNC) to add synchronization
> mechanism, when ref->data->release is called, the flag will be setted,
> and the "wait_event" in blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait must wait flag becoming
> true as well, which will limit percpu_ref_exit to execute ahead of time.
> 
> Although the problem was not reproduced in mainline, it may also has
> problem when the passthrough IO which will go directly to
> blk_cleanup_queue and cause the problem as well.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Wensheng <zhangwensheng5@...wei.com>

As the documentation said, this is not how you mark things for stable
backports.

> ---
>  block/blk-core.c       | 4 +++-
>  block/blk-mq.c         | 7 +++++++
>  include/linux/blk-mq.h | 1 +
>  include/linux/blkdev.h | 2 ++
>  4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
> index 27fb1357ad4b..4b73f46e62ec 100644
> --- a/block/blk-core.c
> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> @@ -312,7 +312,8 @@ void blk_cleanup_queue(struct request_queue *q)
>  	 * prevent that blk_mq_run_hw_queues() accesses the hardware queues
>  	 * after draining finished.
>  	 */
> -	blk_freeze_queue(q);
> +	blk_freeze_queue_start(q);
> +	blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait_sync(q);
>  
>  	blk_queue_flag_set(QUEUE_FLAG_DEAD, q);
>  
> @@ -403,6 +404,7 @@ static void blk_queue_usage_counter_release(struct percpu_ref *ref)
>  	struct request_queue *q =
>  		container_of(ref, struct request_queue, q_usage_counter);
>  
> +	blk_queue_flag_set(QUEUE_FLAG_USAGE_COUNT_SYNC, q);
>  	wake_up_all(&q->mq_freeze_wq);
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 93d9d60980fb..44e764257511 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -165,6 +165,7 @@ void blk_freeze_queue_start(struct request_queue *q)
>  {
>  	mutex_lock(&q->mq_freeze_lock);
>  	if (++q->mq_freeze_depth == 1) {
> +		blk_queue_flag_clear(QUEUE_FLAG_USAGE_COUNT_SYNC, q);
>  		percpu_ref_kill(&q->q_usage_counter);
>  		mutex_unlock(&q->mq_freeze_lock);
>  		if (queue_is_mq(q))
> @@ -175,6 +176,12 @@ void blk_freeze_queue_start(struct request_queue *q)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blk_freeze_queue_start);
>  
> +void blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait_sync(struct request_queue *q)
> +{
> +	wait_event(q->mq_freeze_wq, percpu_ref_is_zero(&q->q_usage_counter) &&
> +			test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_USAGE_COUNT_SYNC, &q->queue_flags));

No timeout ever?


> +}
> +
>  void blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait(struct request_queue *q)
>  {
>  	wait_event(q->mq_freeze_wq, percpu_ref_is_zero(&q->q_usage_counter));
> diff --git a/include/linux/blk-mq.h b/include/linux/blk-mq.h
> index e2d9daf7e8dd..50fd56f85b31 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blk-mq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blk-mq.h
> @@ -868,6 +868,7 @@ void blk_mq_freeze_queue(struct request_queue *q);
>  void blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(struct request_queue *q);
>  void blk_freeze_queue_start(struct request_queue *q);
>  void blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait(struct request_queue *q);
> +void blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait_sync(struct request_queue *q);
>  int blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait_timeout(struct request_queue *q,
>  				     unsigned long timeout);
>  
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index 2f7b43444c5f..93ed8b166d66 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -575,6 +575,8 @@ struct request_queue {
>  #define QUEUE_FLAG_HCTX_ACTIVE	28	/* at least one blk-mq hctx is active */
>  #define QUEUE_FLAG_NOWAIT       29	/* device supports NOWAIT */
>  #define QUEUE_FLAG_SQ_SCHED     30	/* single queue style io dispatch */
> +/* sync for q_usage_counter */
> +#define QUEUE_FLAG_USAGE_COUNT_SYNC    31

Why not put the comment a the end of the line like everything else in
this list?

And why not use tabs?

thanks,

greg k-h