linux-kernel - Re: Re: [PATCH bpf v2] bpf: Fix deadlock when freeing cgroup storage

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: <CAADnVQ+ws4c=G02HjR7Oww_cSuoVFfkWMjP0BbnUrrDgo6tywQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:15:56 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, 
	Eduard Zingerman <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>, David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>, 
	"open list:BPF [STORAGE & CGROUPS]" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH bpf v2] bpf: Fix deadlock when freeing cgroup storage

On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 1:31 AM Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/25/25 4:20 AM, Martin KaFai Lau Wrote:
> > On 12/20/24 10:10 PM, Abel Wu wrote:
> >> The following commit
> >> bc235cdb423a ("bpf: Prevent deadlock from recursive bpf_task_storage_[get|delete]")
> >> first introduced deadlock prevention for fentry/fexit programs attaching
> >> on bpf_task_storage helpers. That commit also employed the logic in map
> >> free path in its v6 version.
> >>
> >> Later bpf_cgrp_storage was first introduced in
> >> c4bcfb38a95e ("bpf: Implement cgroup storage available to non-cgroup-attached bpf progs")
> >> which faces the same issue as bpf_task_storage, instead of its busy
> >> counter, NULL was passed to bpf_local_storage_map_free() which opened
> >> a window to cause deadlock:
> >>
> >>     <TASK>
> >>         (acquiring local_storage->lock)
> >>     _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x50
> >>     bpf_local_storage_update+0xd1/0x460
> >>     bpf_cgrp_storage_get+0x109/0x130
> >>     bpf_prog_a4d4a370ba857314_cgrp_ptr+0x139/0x170
> >>     ? __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x16/0x80
> >>     bpf_trampoline_6442485186+0x43/0xa4
> >>     cgroup_storage_ptr+0x9/0x20
> >>         (holding local_storage->lock)
> >>     bpf_selem_unlink_storage_nolock.constprop.0+0x135/0x160
> >>     bpf_selem_unlink_storage+0x6f/0x110
> >>     bpf_local_storage_map_free+0xa2/0x110
> >>     bpf_map_free_deferred+0x5b/0x90
> >>     process_one_work+0x17c/0x390
> >>     worker_thread+0x251/0x360
> >>     kthread+0xd2/0x100
> >>     ret_from_fork+0x34/0x50
> >>     ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
> >>     </TASK>
> >>
> >> Progs:
> >>   - A: SEC("fentry/cgroup_storage_ptr")
> >
> > The v1 thread has suggested using notrace in a few functions. I didn't see any counterarguments that wouldn't be sufficient.
> >
> > imo, that should be a better option instead of having more unnecessary failures in all other normal use cases which will not be interested in tracing cgroup_storage_ptr().

Martin,

task_storage_map_free() is doing this busy inc/dec already,
in that sense doing the same in cgroup_storage_map_free() fits.

fentry/cgroup_storage_ptr use case is certainly convoluted.

I don't buy that adding notrace or doing CFALGS_REMOVE_
will hurt observability,
but this patch seems ok.

wdyt?