linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] mm: Fix race between __split_huge_pmd

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: <2C9D897B-0E96-42F0-B3C4-9926E6DF5F4B@nvidia.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 11:14:57 -0400
From: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
To: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Zi Yan <zi.yan@...rutgers.edu>,
 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm: Fix race between __split_huge_pmd_locked() and
 GUP-fast

On 27 Apr 2024, at 0:41, John Hubbard wrote:

> On 4/25/24 10:07 AM, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> __split_huge_pmd_locked() can be called for a present THP, devmap or
>> (non-present) migration entry. It calls pmdp_invalidate()
>> unconditionally on the pmdp and only determines if it is present or not
>> based on the returned old pmd. This is a problem for the migration entry
>> case because pmd_mkinvalid(), called by pmdp_invalidate() must only be
>> called for a present pmd.
>>
>> On arm64 at least, pmd_mkinvalid() will mark the pmd such that any
>> future call to pmd_present() will return true. And therefore any
>> lockless pgtable walker could see the migration entry pmd in this state
>> and start interpretting the fields as if it were present, leading to
>> BadThings (TM). GUP-fast appears to be one such lockless pgtable walker.
>> I suspect the same is possible on other architectures.
>>
>> Fix this by only calling pmdp_invalidate() for a present pmd. And for
>
> Yes, this seems like a good design decision (after reading through the
> discussion that you all had in the other threads).

This will only be good for arm64 and does not prevent other arch developers
to write code breaking arm64, since only arm64's pmd_mkinvalid() can turn
a swap entry to a pmd_present() entry.

>
>> good measure let's add a warning to the generic implementation of
>> pmdp_invalidate(). I've manually reviewed all other
>> pmdp_invalidate[_ad]() call sites and believe all others to be
>> conformant.
>>
>> This is a theoretical bug found during code review. I don't have any
>> test case to trigger it in practice.
>>
>> Fixes: 84c3fc4e9c56 ("mm: thp: check pmd migration entry in common path")
>> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
>> ---
>>
>> Applies on top of v6.9-rc5. Passes all the mm selftests on arm64.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ryan
>>
>>
>>   mm/huge_memory.c     | 5 +++--
>>   mm/pgtable-generic.c | 2 ++
>>   2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>> index 89f58c7603b2..80939ad00718 100644
>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>> @@ -2513,12 +2513,12 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>>   	 * for this pmd), then we flush the SMP TLB and finally we write the
>>   	 * non-huge version of the pmd entry with pmd_populate.
>>   	 */
>> -	old_pmd = pmdp_invalidate(vma, haddr, pmd);
>>
>> -	pmd_migration = is_pmd_migration_entry(old_pmd);
>> +	pmd_migration = is_pmd_migration_entry(*pmd);
>>   	if (unlikely(pmd_migration)) {
>>   		swp_entry_t entry;
>>
>> +		old_pmd = *pmd;
>>   		entry = pmd_to_swp_entry(old_pmd);
>>   		page = pfn_swap_entry_to_page(entry);
>>   		write = is_writable_migration_entry(entry);
>> @@ -2529,6 +2529,7 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>>   		soft_dirty = pmd_swp_soft_dirty(old_pmd);
>>   		uffd_wp = pmd_swp_uffd_wp(old_pmd);
>>   	} else {
>> +		old_pmd = pmdp_invalidate(vma, haddr, pmd);
>
> This looks good, except that now I am deeply confused about the pre-existing
> logic. I thought that migration entries were a subset of swap entries,
> but this code seems to be treating is_pmd_migration_entry() as a
> synonym for "is a swap entry". Can you shed any light on this for me?

It is likely because kernel only split present pmd and migration pmd, but I
could be wrong since the code is changed a lot since splitting migration
pmd was added. We either need to check all call sites or check pmd_present()
instead of is_pmd_migration_entry() and handle all possible situations.

>
>
>>   		page = pmd_page(old_pmd);
>>   		folio = page_folio(page);
>>   		if (pmd_dirty(old_pmd)) {
>> diff --git a/mm/pgtable-generic.c b/mm/pgtable-generic.c
>> index 4fcd959dcc4d..74e34ea90656 100644
>> --- a/mm/pgtable-generic.c
>> +++ b/mm/pgtable-generic.c
>> @@ -198,6 +198,7 @@ pgtable_t pgtable_trans_huge_withdraw(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmdp)
>>   pmd_t pmdp_invalidate(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
>>   		     pmd_t *pmdp)
>>   {
>> +	VM_WARN_ON(!pmd_present(*pmdp));
>>   	pmd_t old = pmdp_establish(vma, address, pmdp, pmd_mkinvalid(*pmdp));
>>   	flush_pmd_tlb_range(vma, address, address + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);
>>   	return old;
>> @@ -208,6 +209,7 @@ pmd_t pmdp_invalidate(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
>>   pmd_t pmdp_invalidate_ad(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
>>   			 pmd_t *pmdp)
>>   {
>> +	VM_WARN_ON(!pmd_present(*pmdp));
>
> Should these be VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(), instead?
>
> Also, this seems like a good place to put a little comment in, to mark the
> new design constraint. Something like "Only present entries are allowed
> to be invalidated", perhaps.
>
>
>>   	return pmdp_invalidate(vma, address, pmdp);
>>   }
>>   #endif
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
>>
>
> thanks,
> -- 
> John Hubbard
> NVIDIA


--
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (855 bytes)