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: Fri, 31 May 2024 16:41:05 +0000
From: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
	Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm,memory_hotplug: {READ,WRITE}_ONCE unsynchronized
 zone data

On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 04:05:12PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 21.05.24 14:57, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > > +	return zone->zone_start_pfn + READ_ONCE(zone->spanned_pages);
> > 
> > It's weird to apply that logic only to spanned_pages, whereby zone_start_pfn
> > can (and will) similarly change when onlining/offlining memory.
> > 
> Oh, yep. For some reason I had decided that zone_start_pfn was fixed
> but that is (actually very obviously) not true!
> 
> Will take a closer look and extend v2 to cover that too, unless
> someone finds a reason this whole patch is nonsense.
> 
> Thanks for the review.

Hmm so while poking around during spare moments this week I learned
that compaction.c also stores a bunch of data in struct zone that is
unsynchronized.

It seems pretty unlikely that you can corrupt any memory there (unless
there's some race possible with pfn_to_online_page, which is an
orthogonal question), but it does seem like if the compiler gets smart
with us we could maybe have a compaction run that takes quasi-forever
or something weird like that.

It seems easy enough to just spam READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE everywhere
there too, this would remove that risk, make KCSAN happy and serve as
a kinda "this is unsynchronized, take care" comment. (There's also at
least one place where we could put data_race()).

On the other hand it's a bit verbose & visually ugly. Personally I
think it's a pretty minor downside, but anyone feel differently?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ