linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] sched: fix sched_numa_find_nth

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:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:43:14 +0800
From:   Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com>
To:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>
CC:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Peter Lafreniere <peter@...jl.ca>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        <shiju.jose@...wei.com>, <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
        <prime.zeng@...wei.com>, <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] sched: fix sched_numa_find_nth_cpu() in CPU-less case

Hi Yury,

On 2023/8/11 0:24, Yury Norov wrote:
> When the node provided by user is CPU-less, corresponding record in
> sched_domains_numa_masks is not set. Trying to dereference it in the
> following code leads to kernel crash.
> 
> To avoid it, start searching from the nearest node with CPUs.
> 
> Fixes: cd7f55359c90 ("sched: add sched_numa_find_nth_cpu()")
> Reported-by: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAAH8bW8C5humYnfpW3y5ypwx0E-09A3QxFE1JFzR66v+mO4XfA@mail.gmail.com/T/
> Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZMHSNQfv39HN068m@yury-ThinkPad/T/#mf6431cb0b7f6f05193c41adeee444bc95bf2b1c4
> Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
> ---
> 
> This has been discovered and fixed by Yicong Yang:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAAH8bW8C5humYnfpW3y5ypwx0E-09A3QxFE1JFzR66v+mO4XfA@mail.gmail.com/T/
> 
> When discovering Guenter's failure report for sparc64, I found it's due to
> the same problem. And while fixing, I found an opportunity to generalize
> nearest NUMA node search and avoid code duplication.
> 
> Yicong, if you like this approach, please feel free to add your co-developed-by
> or any appropriate tags.
> 

Looks fine to me. One nit below.

Reviewed-by: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>

>  kernel/sched/topology.c | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> index d3a3b2646ec4..66b387172b6f 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> @@ -2113,10 +2113,14 @@ static int hop_cmp(const void *a, const void *b)
>   */
>  int sched_numa_find_nth_cpu(const struct cpumask *cpus, int cpu, int node)
>  {
> -	struct __cmp_key k = { .cpus = cpus, .node = node, .cpu = cpu };
> +	struct __cmp_key k = { .cpus = cpus, .cpu = cpu };
>  	struct cpumask ***hop_masks;
>  	int hop, ret = nr_cpu_ids;
>  
> +	/* CPU-less node entries are uninitialized in sched_domains_numa_masks */
> +	node = numa_nearest_node(node, N_CPU);
> +	k.node = node;
> +

We may also have problem if node == NUMA_NO_NODE, is it better to mention this
in the function comment or check it before we going on? Currently this function
is only used in cpumask_local_spread() and the caller has already checked it, but
considering this is an export function so somebody may use it directly.

I wondering whether we should put this block within the protection of rcu_read_lock()
for some issues like hotplug or not. Is it possible if @node become CPU-less subsequently?

>  	rcu_read_lock();
>  
>  	k.masks = rcu_dereference(sched_domains_numa_masks);
>