linux-kernel - Re: Prevent inconsistent CPU state after sequence of dlclose/dlopen

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: <87plkutxba.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 18:04:25 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,  "carlos@...hat.com"
 <carlos@...hat.com>,  Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,  Peter Zijlstra
 <peterz@...radead.org>,  linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
  x86@...nel.org,  paulmck <paulmck@...nel.org>,  Michael Jeanson
 <mjeanson@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: Prevent inconsistent CPU state after sequence of dlclose/dlopen

* Mathieu Desnoyers:

> I was discussing with Mark Rutland recently, and he pointed out that a
> sequence of dlclose/dlopen mapping new code at the same addresses in
> multithreaded environments is an issue on ARM, and possibly on Intel/AMD
> with the newer TLB broadcast maintenance.
>
> I maintain the membarrier(2) system call, which provides a
> MEMBARRIER_CMD_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED_SYNC_CORE command for this
> purpose. It's been there since Linux 4.16. It can be configured
> out (CONFIG_MEMBARRIER=n), but it's enabled by default.
>
> Calling this after dlclose() in glibc would prevent this issue.
>
> Is it handled in some other way, or should we open a bugzilla
> entry to track this ?

There is nothing special about dlopen/dlclose, we just use mmap/munmap.
If there is a synchronization problem, we'd have to add to add barriers
to mmap and munmap.

But why isn't it up to the kernel to handle this correctly?

Thanks,
Florian