linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] locking/ww_mutex: Adjust to lockdep nest

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]

Message-ID: <c5e8899f4bcba24a787cd0f4c92c3fc4d7ef3130.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2024 15:43:29 +0200
From: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will
 Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Boqun Feng
 <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten@...khorst.se>, Christian
 König <christian.koenig@....com>,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/ww_mutex: Adjust to lockdep nest_lock
 requirements

On Wed, 2024-10-09 at 15:10 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 11:20:31AM +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> > When using mutex_acquire_nest() with a nest_lock, lockdep refcounts
> > the
> > number of acquired lockdep_maps of mutexes of the same class, and
> > also
> > keeps a pointer to the first acquired lockdep_map of a class. That
> > pointer
> > is then used for various comparison-, printing- and checking
> > purposes,
> > but there is no mechanism to actively ensure that lockdep_map stays
> > in
> > memory. Instead, a warning is printed if the lockdep_map is freed
> > and
> > there are still held locks of the same lock class, even if the
> > lockdep_map
> > itself has been released.
> > 
> > In the context of WW/WD transactions that means that if a user
> > unlocks
> > and frees a ww_mutex from within an ongoing ww transaction, and
> > that
> > mutex happens to be the first ww_mutex grabbed in the transaction,
> > such a warning is printed and there might be a risk of a UAF.
> > 
> > Note that this is only problem when lockdep is enabled and affects
> > only
> > dereferences of struct lockdep_map.
> > 
> > Adjust to this by adding a fake lockdep_map to the acquired context
> > and
> > make sure it is the first acquired lockdep map of the associated
> > ww_mutex class. Then hold it for the duration of the WW/WD
> > transaction.
> > 
> > This has the side effect that trying to lock a ww mutex *without* a
> > ww_acquire_context but where a such context has been acquire, we'd
> > see
> > a lockdep splat. The test-ww_mutex.c selftest attempts to do that,
> > so
> > modify that particular test to not acquire a ww_acquire_context if
> > it
> > is not going to be used.
> > 
> > v2:
> > - Lower the number of locks in the test-ww_mutex
> >   stress(STRESS_ALL) test to accommodate the dummy lock
> >   introduced in this patch without overflowing lockdep held lock
> >   references.
> 
> Thanks, I rebased tip/locking/core, which should now have this patch.

Thanks.
It takes some time for that failing CI test to run, though so, and
since I can't repro the failure locally I'll keep a watch out.

/Thomas