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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 13:22:53 -0500 From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com> To: Olivier Langlois <olivier@...llion01.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] coredump: Allow coredumps to pipes to work with io_uring Olivier Langlois <olivier@...llion01.com> writes: > On Mon, 2022-08-22 at 17:16 -0400, Olivier Langlois wrote: >> >> What is stopping the task calling do_coredump() to be interrupted and >> call task_work_add() from the interrupt context? >> >> This is precisely what I was experiencing last summer when I did work >> on this issue. >> >> My understanding of how async I/O works with io_uring is that the >> task >> is added to a wait queue without being put to sleep and when the >> io_uring callback is called from the interrupt context, >> task_work_add() >> is called so that the next time io_uring syscall is invoked, pending >> work is processed to complete the I/O. >> >> So if: >> >> 1. io_uring request is initiated AND the task is in a wait queue >> 2. do_coredump() is called before the I/O is completed >> >> IMHO, this is how you end up having task_work_add() called while the >> coredump is generated. >> > I forgot to add that I have experienced the issue with TCP/IP I/O. > > I suspect that with a TCP socket, the race condition window is much > larger than if it was disk I/O and this might make it easier to > reproduce the issue this way... I was under the apparently mistaken impression that the io_uring task_work_add only comes from the io_uring userspace helper threads. Those are definitely suppressed by my change. Do you have any idea in the code where io_uring code is being called in an interrupt context? I would really like to trace that code path so I have a better grasp on what is happening. If task_work_add is being called from interrupt context then something additional from what I have proposed certainly needs to be done. Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists