linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 16/17] mm: make vma cache SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY

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: <22c002b5-9aca-460b-90fb-772adb9e5f61@suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:00:57 +0100
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org, willy@...radead.org,
 liam.howlett@...cle.com, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
 hannes@...xchg.org, mjguzik@...il.com, oliver.sang@...el.com,
 mgorman@...hsingularity.net, david@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com,
 oleg@...hat.com, dave@...olabs.net, paulmck@...nel.org, brauner@...nel.org,
 dhowells@...hat.com, hdanton@...a.com, hughd@...gle.com,
 lokeshgidra@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com, jannh@...gle.com,
 shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, souravpanda@...gle.com, pasha.tatashin@...een.com,
 klarasmodin@...il.com, corbet@....net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 16/17] mm: make vma cache SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU

On 1/8/25 19:44, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 10:21 AM Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/26/24 18:07, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> > To enable SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU for vma cache we need to ensure that
>> > object reuse before RCU grace period is over will be detected by
>> > lock_vma_under_rcu(). Current checks are sufficient as long as vma
>> > is detached before it is freed. Implement this guarantee by calling
>> > vma_ensure_detached() before vma is freed and make vm_area_cachep
>> > SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU. This will facilitate vm_area_struct reuse and
>> > will minimize the number of call_rcu() calls.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
>>
>> I've noticed vm_area_dup() went back to the approach of "we memcpy
>> everything including vma_lock and detached (now the vm_refcnt) followed by a
>> vma_init_lock(..., true) that does refcount_set(&vma->vm_refcnt, 0);
>> Is that now safe against a racing lock_vma_under_rcu()? I think it's not?
> 
> I think it's safe because vma created by vm_area_dup() is not in the
> vma tree yet, so lock_vma_under_rcu() does not see it until it's added
> into the tree. Note also that at the time when the new vma gets added
> into the tree, the vma has to be write-locked
> (vma_iter_store()->vma_mark_attached()->vma_assert_write_locked()).
> So, lock_vma_under_rcu() won't use the new vma even after it's added
> into the tree until we unlock the vma.


What about something like this, where vma starts out as attached as thus
reachable:

A:			B:	C:
lock_vma_under_rcu()
  vma = mas_walk()
  vma_start_read()
    vm_lock_seq == mm->mm_lock_seq.sequence

			vma detached and freed
					
				vm_area_dup()
				- vma reallocated
				- memcpy() copies non-zero refcnt from orig

    __refcount_inc_not_zero_limited() succeeds

				vma_init_lock();
				refcount_set(&vma->vm_refcnt, 0);

    - vm_lock_seq validation fails (could it even succeed?)
    vma_refcount_put(vma);
      __refcount_dec_and_test makes refcount -1