linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix missing RCU reader protection in perf_event_clear

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: <39bb4c06-a8e8-4eef-8659-534939c9987f@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 12:25:59 -0400
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
 kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix missing RCU reader protection in
 perf_event_clear_cpumask()



On 2024-09-13 12:23 p.m., kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> Running rcutorture scenario TREE05, the below warning is triggered.
> 
> [   32.604594] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> [   32.605928] 6.11.0-rc5-00040-g4ba4f1afb6a9 #55238 Not tainted
> [   32.607812] -----------------------------
> [   32.609140] kernel/events/core.c:13946 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
> [   32.611595] other info that might help us debug this:
> [   32.614247] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
> [   32.616392] 3 locks held by cpuhp/4/35:
> [   32.617687]  #0: ffffffffb666a650 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
> [   32.620563]  #1: ffffffffb666cd20 (cpuhp_state-down){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
> [   32.623412]  #2: ffffffffb677c288 (pmus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: perf_event_exit_cpu_context+0x32/0x2f0
> 
> In perf_event_clear_cpumask(), uses list_for_each_entry_rcu() without an
> obvious RCU read-side critical section.
> 
> Either pmus_srcu or pmus_lock is good enough to protect the pmus list.
> In the current context, pmus_lock is already held. The
> list_for_each_entry_rcu() is not required.
> 
> Fixes: 4ba4f1afb6a9 ("perf: Generic hotplug support for a PMU with a scope")
> Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2b66dff8-b827-494b-b151-1ad8d56f13e6@paulmck-laptop/
> Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202409131559.545634cc-oliver.sang@intel.com

Forgot to add the below tag, please fold it.

Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>

Thanks,
Kan
> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 20e97c1aa4d6..5ba9934b49df 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -13912,7 +13912,7 @@ static void perf_event_clear_cpumask(unsigned int cpu)
>  	}
>  
>  	/* migrate */
> -	list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry, lockdep_is_held(&pmus_srcu)) {
> +	list_for_each_entry(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
>  		if (pmu->scope == PERF_PMU_SCOPE_NONE ||
>  		    WARN_ON_ONCE(pmu->scope >= PERF_PMU_MAX_SCOPE))
>  			continue;