[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221129144834.GW4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 06:48:34 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@...el.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, rcu@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] rcu-tasks: Fix race against exiting pid_ns
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:55:00AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 04:22:40PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:54:57PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > Pengfei Xu has reported a deadlock involving calls to unshare(),
> > > perf_event_open() and clone3() calls. It requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN
> > > to reproduce (at least I don't see a way for a non privilege process to
> > > reproduce).
> > >
> > > See this thread for details: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y3sOgrOmMQqPMItu@xpf.sh.intel.com/
> > > And this document for the collaborative analysis with Boqun, Paul and Neeraj:
> > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hJxgiZ5TMZ4YJkdJPLAkRvq7sYQ-A7svgA8no6i-v8k
> > >
> > > The two first patches are small improvements. The fix is in the last patch.
> > >
> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/linux-dynticks.git
> > > rcu/dev
> > >
> > > HEAD: 45ef5a0a4be4e0db9eadcc86e8f346d34c62e744
> >
> > Hearing no objections, queued for further review and testing.
> >
> > And thank you very much! That race between synchronize_rcu_tasks() and
> > zap_pid_ns_processes() certainly was more than a bit on the non-trivial
> > side. Good show!!!
>
> Thanks!
>
> Also please replace the last patch with the following to fix
> a !CONFIG_RCU_TASKS issue:
Like this? ;-)
a0c355bbdfee ("squash! rcu-tasks: Fix synchronize_rcu_tasks() VS zap_pid_ns_processes()")
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 18:15:46 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] rcu-tasks: Fix synchronize_rcu_tasks() VS
> zap_pid_ns_processes()
>
> RCU Tasks and PID-namespace unshare can interact in do_exit() in a
> complicated circular dependency:
>
> 1) TASK A calls unshare(CLONE_NEWPID), this creates a new PID namespace
> that every subsequent child of TASK A will belong to. But TASK A
> doesn't itself belong to that new PID namespace.
>
> 2) TASK A forks() and creates TASK B. TASK A stays attached to its PID
> namespace (let's say PID_NS1) and TASK B is the first task belonging
> to the new PID namespace created by unshare() (let's call it PID_NS2).
>
> 3) Since TASK B is the first task attached to PID_NS2, it becomes the
> PID_NS2 child reaper.
>
> 4) TASK A forks() again and creates TASK C which get attached to PID_NS2.
> Note how TASK C has TASK A as a parent (belonging to PID_NS1) but has
> TASK B (belonging to PID_NS2) as a pid_namespace child_reaper.
>
> 5) TASK B exits and since it is the child reaper for PID_NS2, it has to
> kill all other tasks attached to PID_NS2, and wait for all of them to
> die before getting reaped itself (zap_pid_ns_process()).
>
> 6) TASK A calls synchronize_rcu_tasks() which leads to
> synchronize_srcu(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu).
>
> 7) TASK B is waiting for TASK C to get reaped. But TASK B is under a
> tasks_rcu_exit_srcu SRCU critical section (exit_notify() is between
> exit_tasks_rcu_start() and exit_tasks_rcu_finish()), blocking TASK A.
>
> 8) TASK C exits and since TASK A is its parent, it waits for it to reap
> TASK C, but it can't because TASK A waits for TASK B that waits for
> TASK C.
>
> Pid_namespace semantics can hardly be changed at this point. But the
> coverage of tasks_rcu_exit_srcu can be reduced instead.
>
> The current task is assumed not to be concurrently reapable at this
> stage of exit_notify() and therefore tasks_rcu_exit_srcu can be
> temporarily relaxed without breaking its constraints, providing a way
> out of the deadlock scenario.
>
> Fixes: 3f95aa81d265 ("rcu: Make TASKS_RCU handle tasks that are almost done exiting")
> Reported-by: Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@...el.com>
> Suggested-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> Suggested-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>
> Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
> Cc: Eric W . Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> ---
> include/linux/rcupdate.h | 2 ++
> kernel/pid_namespace.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> kernel/rcu/tasks.h | 15 +++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> index 89b3036746d2..a19d91d5461c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> @@ -238,6 +238,7 @@ void synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude(void);
>
> #define rcu_note_voluntary_context_switch(t) rcu_tasks_qs(t, false)
> void exit_tasks_rcu_start(void);
> +void exit_tasks_rcu_stop(void);
> void exit_tasks_rcu_finish(void);
> #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU_GENERIC */
> #define rcu_tasks_classic_qs(t, preempt) do { } while (0)
> @@ -246,6 +247,7 @@ void exit_tasks_rcu_finish(void);
> #define call_rcu_tasks call_rcu
> #define synchronize_rcu_tasks synchronize_rcu
> static inline void exit_tasks_rcu_start(void) { }
> +static inline void exit_tasks_rcu_stop(void) { }
> static inline void exit_tasks_rcu_finish(void) { }
> #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU_GENERIC */
>
> diff --git a/kernel/pid_namespace.c b/kernel/pid_namespace.c
> index f4f8cb0435b4..fc21c5d5fd5d 100644
> --- a/kernel/pid_namespace.c
> +++ b/kernel/pid_namespace.c
> @@ -244,7 +244,24 @@ void zap_pid_ns_processes(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns)
> set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> if (pid_ns->pid_allocated == init_pids)
> break;
> + /*
> + * Release tasks_rcu_exit_srcu to avoid following deadlock:
> + *
> + * 1) TASK A unshare(CLONE_NEWPID)
> + * 2) TASK A fork() twice -> TASK B (child reaper for new ns)
> + * and TASK C
> + * 3) TASK B exits, kills TASK C, waits for TASK A to reap it
> + * 4) TASK A calls synchronize_rcu_tasks()
> + * -> synchronize_srcu(tasks_rcu_exit_srcu)
> + * 5) *DEADLOCK*
> + *
> + * It is considered safe to release tasks_rcu_exit_srcu here
> + * because we assume the current task can not be concurrently
> + * reaped at this point.
> + */
> + exit_tasks_rcu_stop();
> schedule();
> + exit_tasks_rcu_start();
> }
> __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> index 9a8114114b48..4dda8e6e5707 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> @@ -1016,16 +1016,27 @@ void exit_tasks_rcu_start(void) __acquires(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu)
> * task is exiting and may be removed from the tasklist. See
> * corresponding synchronize_srcu() for further details.
> */
> -void exit_tasks_rcu_finish(void) __releases(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu)
> +void exit_tasks_rcu_stop(void) __releases(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu)
> {
> struct task_struct *t = current;
>
> __srcu_read_unlock(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu, t->rcu_tasks_idx);
> - exit_tasks_rcu_finish_trace(t);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Contribute to protect against tasklist scan blind spot while the
> + * task is exiting and may be removed from the tasklist. See
> + * corresponding synchronize_srcu() for further details.
> + */
> +void exit_tasks_rcu_finish(void)
> +{
> + exit_tasks_rcu_stop();
> + exit_tasks_rcu_finish_trace(current);
> }
>
> #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU */
> void exit_tasks_rcu_start(void) { }
> +void exit_tasks_rcu_stop(void) { }
> void exit_tasks_rcu_finish(void) { exit_tasks_rcu_finish_trace(current); }
> #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU */
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists