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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2022 12:52:09 +0530
From:   Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
CC:     <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        <sboyd@...nel.org>, <rafael@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] devcoredump : Serialize devcd_del work


On 8/17/2022 1:53 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 09:43:48PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
>> Hi Johannes/Kees,
> 
> Hi!
> 
>>
>> Sorry for reminding on it again.
>> Any hope of this one to get into devcoredump ?
> 
> I don't know this code well enough to comment on the solution, but it
> seems designed and justified correctly, at least. :)

Thanks Kees for the reply.

Hi @Johannes,

This patch is running in our internal build from a very long time and it 
did not show any regression.
Would like to get your ack on it ?

-Mukesh
> 
> I'll leave it to Johannes for review.
> 
> -Kees
> 
>>
>> -Mukesh
>>
>>
>> On 5/27/2022 7:33 PM, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
>>> In following scenario(diagram), when one thread X running dev_coredumpm()
>>> adds devcd device to the framework which sends uevent notification to
>>> userspace and another thread Y reads this uevent and call to
>>> devcd_data_write() which eventually try to delete the queued timer that
>>> is not initialized/queued yet.
>>>
>>> So, debug object reports some warning and in the meantime, timer is
>>> initialized and queued from X path. and from Y path, it gets reinitialized
>>> again and timer->entry.pprev=NULL and try_to_grab_pending() stucks.
>>>
>>> To fix this, introduce mutex and a boolean flag to serialize the behaviour.
>>>
>>>    	cpu0(X)			                cpu1(Y)
>>>
>>>       dev_coredump() uevent sent to user space
>>>       device_add()  ======================> user space process Y reads the
>>>                                             uevents writes to devcd fd
>>>                                             which results into writes to
>>>
>>>                                            devcd_data_write()
>>>                                              mod_delayed_work()
>>>                                                try_to_grab_pending()
>>>                                                  del_timer()
>>>                                                    debug_assert_init()
>>>      INIT_DELAYED_WORK()
>>>      schedule_delayed_work()
>>>                                                      debug_object_fixup()
>>>                                                        timer_fixup_assert_init()
>>>                                                          timer_setup()
>>>                                                            do_init_timer()
>>>                                                          /*
>>>                                                           Above call reinitializes
>>>                                                           the timer to
>>>                                                           timer->entry.pprev=NULL
>>>                                                           and this will be checked
>>>                                                           later in timer_pending() call.
>>>                                                          */
>>>                                                    timer_pending()
>>>                                                     !hlist_unhashed_lockless(&timer->entry)
>>>                                                       !h->pprev
>>>                                                   /*
>>>                                                     del_timer() checks h->pprev and finds
>>>                                                     it to be NULL due to which
>>>                                                     try_to_grab_pending() stucks.
>>>                                                   */
>>>
>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2e1f81e2-428c-f11f-ce92-eb11048cb271@quicinc.com/
>>> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
>>> v4->v5:
>>>    - Rebased it.
>>>
>>> v3->v4:
>>>    - flg variable renamed to delete_work.
>>>
>>> v2->v3:
>>>    Addressed comments from gregkh
>>>    - Wrapped the commit text and corrected the alignment.
>>>    - Described the reason to introduce new variables.
>>>    - Restored the blank line.
>>>    - rename the del_wk_queued to flg.
>>>    Addressed comments from tglx
>>>    - Added a comment which explains the race which looks obvious however
>>>      would not occur between disabled_store and devcd_del work.
>>>
>>>
>>> v1->v2:
>>>    - Added del_wk_queued flag to serialize the race between devcd_data_write()
>>>      and disabled_store() => devcd_free().
>>>    drivers/base/devcoredump.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>    1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/devcoredump.c b/drivers/base/devcoredump.c
>>> index f4d794d..1c06781 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/base/devcoredump.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/base/devcoredump.c
>>> @@ -25,6 +25,47 @@ struct devcd_entry {
>>>    	struct device devcd_dev;
>>>    	void *data;
>>>    	size_t datalen;
>>> +	/*
>>> +	 * Here, mutex is required to serialize the calls to del_wk work between
>>> +	 * user/kernel space which happens when devcd is added with device_add()
>>> +	 * and that sends uevent to user space. User space reads the uevents,
>>> +	 * and calls to devcd_data_write() which try to modify the work which is
>>> +	 * not even initialized/queued from devcoredump.
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 *        cpu0(X)                                 cpu1(Y)
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 *        dev_coredump() uevent sent to user space
>>> +	 *        device_add()  ======================> user space process Y reads the
>>> +	 *                                              uevents writes to devcd fd
>>> +	 *                                              which results into writes to
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 *                                             devcd_data_write()
>>> +	 *                                               mod_delayed_work()
>>> +	 *                                                 try_to_grab_pending()
>>> +	 *                                                   del_timer()
>>> +	 *                                                     debug_assert_init()
>>> +	 *       INIT_DELAYED_WORK()
>>> +	 *       schedule_delayed_work()
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 * Also, mutex alone would not be enough to avoid scheduling of
>>> +	 * del_wk work after it get flush from a call to devcd_free()
>>> +	 * mentioned as below.
>>> +	 *
>>> +	 *	disabled_store()
>>> +	 *        devcd_free()
>>> +	 *          mutex_lock()             devcd_data_write()
>>> +	 *          flush_delayed_work()
>>> +	 *          mutex_unlock()
>>> +	 *                                   mutex_lock()
>>> +	 *                                   mod_delayed_work()
>>> +	 *                                   mutex_unlock()
>>> +	 * So, delete_work flag is required.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	struct mutex mutex;
>>> +	bool delete_work;
>>>    	struct module *owner;
>>>    	ssize_t (*read)(char *buffer, loff_t offset, size_t count,
>>>    			void *data, size_t datalen);
>>> @@ -84,7 +125,12 @@ static ssize_t devcd_data_write(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj,
>>>    	struct device *dev = kobj_to_dev(kobj);
>>>    	struct devcd_entry *devcd = dev_to_devcd(dev);
>>> -	mod_delayed_work(system_wq, &devcd->del_wk, 0);
>>> +	mutex_lock(&devcd->mutex);
>>> +	if (!devcd->delete_work) {
>>> +		devcd->delete_work = true;
>>> +		mod_delayed_work(system_wq, &devcd->del_wk, 0);
>>> +	}
>>> +	mutex_unlock(&devcd->mutex);
>>>    	return count;
>>>    }
>>> @@ -112,7 +158,12 @@ static int devcd_free(struct device *dev, void *data)
>>>    {
>>>    	struct devcd_entry *devcd = dev_to_devcd(dev);
>>> +	mutex_lock(&devcd->mutex);
>>> +	if (!devcd->delete_work)
>>> +		devcd->delete_work = true;
>>> +
>>>    	flush_delayed_work(&devcd->del_wk);
>>> +	mutex_unlock(&devcd->mutex);
>>>    	return 0;
>>>    }
>>> @@ -122,6 +173,30 @@ static ssize_t disabled_show(struct class *class, struct class_attribute *attr,
>>>    	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", devcd_disabled);
>>>    }
>>> +/*
>>> + *
>>> + *	disabled_store()                                	worker()
>>> + *	 class_for_each_device(&devcd_class,
>>> + *		NULL, NULL, devcd_free)
>>> + *         ...
>>> + *         ...
>>> + *	   while ((dev = class_dev_iter_next(&iter))
>>> + *                                                             devcd_del()
>>> + *                                                               device_del()
>>> + *                                                                 put_device() <- last reference
>>> + *             error = fn(dev, data)                           devcd_dev_release()
>>> + *             devcd_free(dev, data)                           kfree(devcd)
>>> + *             mutex_lock(&devcd->mutex);
>>> + *
>>> + *
>>> + * In the above diagram, It looks like disabled_store() would be racing with parallely
>>> + * running devcd_del() and result in memory abort while acquiring devcd->mutex which
>>> + * is called after kfree of devcd memory  after dropping its last reference with
>>> + * put_device(). However, this will not happens as fn(dev, data) runs
>>> + * with its own reference to device via klist_node so it is not its last reference.
>>> + * so, above situation would not occur.
>>> + */
>>> +
>>>    static ssize_t disabled_store(struct class *class, struct class_attribute *attr,
>>>    			      const char *buf, size_t count)
>>>    {
>>> @@ -278,13 +353,16 @@ void dev_coredumpm(struct device *dev, struct module *owner,
>>>    	devcd->read = read;
>>>    	devcd->free = free;
>>>    	devcd->failing_dev = get_device(dev);
>>> +	devcd->delete_work = false;
>>> +	mutex_init(&devcd->mutex);
>>>    	device_initialize(&devcd->devcd_dev);
>>>    	dev_set_name(&devcd->devcd_dev, "devcd%d",
>>>    		     atomic_inc_return(&devcd_count));
>>>    	devcd->devcd_dev.class = &devcd_class;
>>> +	mutex_lock(&devcd->mutex);
>>>    	if (device_add(&devcd->devcd_dev))
>>>    		goto put_device;
>>> @@ -301,10 +379,11 @@ void dev_coredumpm(struct device *dev, struct module *owner,
>>>    	INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&devcd->del_wk, devcd_del);
>>>    	schedule_delayed_work(&devcd->del_wk, DEVCD_TIMEOUT);
>>> -
>>> +	mutex_unlock(&devcd->mutex);
>>>    	return;
>>>     put_device:
>>>    	put_device(&devcd->devcd_dev);
>>> +	mutex_unlock(&devcd->mutex);
>>>     put_module:
>>>    	module_put(owner);
>>>     free:
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ