[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <427068db-6695-a1e2-4aa2-033220680eb9@kernel.dk>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 07:14:37 -0700
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>, Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-block] blk-cgroup: Use css_tryget() in
blkcg_destroy_blkgs()
On 11/27/22 8:30 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> Commit 951d1e94801f ("blk-cgroup: Flush stats at blkgs destruction
> path") incorrectly assumes that css_get() will always succeed. That may
> not be true if there is no blkg associated with the blkcg. If css_get()
> fails, the subsequent css_put() call may lead to data corruption as
> was illustrated in a test system that it crashed on bootup when that
> commit was included. Also blkcg may be freed at any time leading to
> use-after-free. Fix it by using css_tryget() instead and bail out if
> the tryget fails.
>
> Fixes: 951d1e94801f ("blk-cgroup: Flush stats at blkgs destruction path")
> Reported-by: Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> ---
> block/blk-cgroup.c | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c
> index 57941d2a8ba3..74fefc8cbcdf 100644
> --- a/block/blk-cgroup.c
> +++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c
> @@ -1088,7 +1088,12 @@ static void blkcg_destroy_blkgs(struct blkcg *blkcg)
>
> might_sleep();
>
> - css_get(&blkcg->css);
> + /*
> + * If css_tryget() fails, there is no blkg to destroy.
> + */
> + if (!css_tryget(&blkcg->css))
> + return;
> +
> spin_lock_irq(&blkcg->lock);
> while (!hlist_empty(&blkcg->blkg_list)) {
> struct blkcg_gq *blkg = hlist_entry(blkcg->blkg_list.first,
This doesn't seem safe to me, but maybe I'm missing something. A tryget
operation can be fine if we're under RCU lock and the entity is freed
appropriately, but what makes it safe here? Could blkcg already be gone
at this point?
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists