linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: trace: send signals asynchronously if !preemptible

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: <94fcfa71-51c1-2130-3452-ec58aaef94d0@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 09:26:38 +0800
From: Hou Tao <houtao@...weicloud.com>
To: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov
 <ast@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
 bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
 KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@...gle.com>,
 Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
 Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard Zingerman
 <eddyz87@...il.com>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
 Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu
 <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 puranjay12@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: trace: send signals asynchronously if
 !preemptible

Hi,

On 1/15/2025 6:36 PM, Puranjay Mohan wrote:
> BPF programs can execute in all kinds of contexts and when a program
> running in a non-preemptible context uses the bpf_send_signal() kfunc,
> it will cause issues because this kfunc can sleep.
>
> So change `irqs_disabled()` to `!preemptible()` that covers all edge
> cases: preempt_count() == 0 and irqs_disabled()
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+97da3d7e0112d59971de@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/67486b09.050a0220.253251.0084.GAE@google.com/
> Fixes: 1bc7896e9ef4 ("bpf: Fix deadlock with rq_lock in bpf_send_signal()")
> Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@...nel.org>
> ---
>  kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> index 1b8db5aee9d3..d162c87e09a8 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> @@ -853,7 +853,7 @@ static int bpf_send_signal_common(u32 sig, enum pid_type type, struct task_struc
>  	if (unlikely(is_global_init(task)))
>  		return -EPERM;
>  
> -	if (irqs_disabled()) {
> +	if (!preemptible()) {

Should we unfold preemptible() to "preempt_count() == 0 &&
!irqs_disabled()" instead, because when preemption is disabled,
preemptible() will evaluate as 0 and the irq_disabled() case will be
skipped ?


>  		/* Do an early check on signal validity. Otherwise,
>  		 * the error is lost in deferred irq_work.
>  		 */