linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next 0/4] blk-cgroup: synchronize del

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]

Date:   Mon, 19 Dec 2022 10:55:57 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     hch@...radead.org, josef@...icpanda.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yukuai3@...wei.com,
        yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/4] blk-cgroup: synchronize del_gendisk() with
 configuring cgroup policy

Hello,

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 11:09:04AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
> 
> iocost is initialized when it's configured the first time, and iocost
> initializing can race with del_gendisk(), which will cause null pointer
> dereference:
> 
> t1				t2
> ioc_qos_write
>  blk_iocost_init
>   rq_qos_add
>   				del_gendisk
>   				 rq_qos_exit
>   				 //iocost is removed from q->roqs
>   blkcg_activate_policy
>    pd_init_fn
>     ioc_pd_init
>      ioc = q_to_ioc(blkg->q)
>      //can't find iocost and return null
> 
> And iolatency is about to switch to the same lazy initialization.
> 
> This patchset fix this problem by synchronize rq_qos_add() and
> blkcg_activate_policy() with rq_qos_exit().

So, the patchset seems a bit overly complicated to me. What do you think
about the following?

* These init/exit paths are super cold path, just protecting them with a
  global mutex is probably enough. If we encounter a scalability problem,
  it's easy to fix down the line.

* If we're synchronizing this with a mutex anyway, no need to grab the
  queue_lock, right? rq_qos_add/del/exit() can all just hold the mutex.

* And we can keep the state tracking within rq_qos. When rq_qos_exit() is
  called, mark it so that future adds will fail - be that a special ->next
  value a queue flag or whatever.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun