linux-kernel - Re: [WIP 0/3] Memory model and atomic API in Rust

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]

Message-ID: <174272a1-e21f-4d85-94ab-f0457bd1c93b@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 11:22:41 -0400
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: comex <comexk@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
  Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>,
  Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
  rust-for-linux <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
  llvm@...ts.linux.dev, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
  Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
  Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
  Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
  Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
  Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
  Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
  Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
  Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
  Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>, Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
  "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
  Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
  Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
  Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, kent.overstreet@...il.com,
  Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, elver@...gle.com,
  Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
  Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
  "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
  linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [WIP 0/3] Memory model and atomic API in Rust

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 05:40:23PM -0400, comex wrote:
> That may be true, but the LLVM issue you cited isn’t a good example.  
> In that issue, the function being miscompiled doesn’t actually use any 
> barriers or atomics itself; only the scaffolding around it does.  The 
> same issue would happen even if the scaffolding used LKMM atomics.
> 
> For anyone curious: The problematic optimization involves an 
> allocation (‘p’) that is initially private to the function, but is 
> returned at the end of the function.  LLVM moves a non-atomic store to 
> that allocation across an external function call (to ‘foo’).  This 
> reordering would be blatantly invalid if any other code could observe 
> the contents of the allocation, but is valid if the allocation is 
> private to the function.  LLVM assumes the latter: after all, the 
> pointer to it hasn’t escaped.  Yet.  Except that in a weak memory 
> model, the escape can ‘time travel’...

It's hard to understand exactly what you mean, but consider the 
following example:

int *globalptr;
int x;

int *f() {
	int *p = kzalloc(sizeof(int));

	L1: *p = 1;
	L2: foo();
	return p;
}

void foo() {
	smp_store_release(&x, 2);
}

void thread0() {
	WRITE_ONCE(globalptr, f());
}

void thread1() {
	int m, n;
	int *q;

	m = smp_load_acquire(&x);
	q = READ_ONCE(globalptr);
	if (m && q)
		n = *q;
}

(If you like, pretend each of these function definitions lives in a 
different source file -- it doesn't matter.)

With no optimization, whenever thread1() reads *q it will always obtain 
1, thanks to the store-release in foo() and the load-acquire() in 
thread1().  But if the compiler swaps L1 and L2 in f() then this is not 
guaranteed.  On a weakly ordered architecture, thread1() could then get 
0 from *q.

I don't know if this is what you meant by "in a weak memory model, the 
escape can ‘time travel'".  Regardless, it seems very clear that any 
compiler which swaps L1 and L2 in f() has a genuine bug.

Alan Stern