linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bpf: Convert lpm_trie::lock to 'raw_spinlock

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: <20241114100945.VWuTi7kg@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 11:09:45 +0100
From: Sebastian Sewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Hou Tao <houtao@...weicloud.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
	Kunwu Chan <kunwu.chan@...ux.dev>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eddy Z <eddyz87@...il.com>,
	Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
	Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	clrkwllms@...nel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
	Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>,
	syzbot+b506de56cbbb63148c33@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: Convert lpm_trie::lock to 'raw_spinlock_t'

On 2024-11-10 10:08:00 [+0800], Hou Tao wrote:
> >> well. However, after changing the kmalloc and its variants to bpf memory
> >> allocator, I think the switch to raw_spinlock_t will be safe. I have
> >> already written a draft patch set. Will post after after polishing and
> >> testing it. WDYT ?
> > Switching lpm to bpf_mem_alloc would address the issue.
> > Why do you want a switch to raw_spin_lock as well?
> > kfree_rcu() is already done outside of the lock.
> 
> After switching to raw_spinlock_t, the lpm trie could be used under
> interrupt context even under PREEMPT_RT.

I would have to dig why the lock has been moved away from raw_spinlock_t
and why we need it back and what changed since. I have some vague memory
that there was a test case which added plenty of items and cleaning it
up created latency spikes.
Note that interrupts are threaded on PREEMPT_RT. Using it in "interrupt
context" would mean you need this in the primary handler/ hardirq.

Sebastian