linux-kernel - [tip: perf/core] perf/core: Fix put

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: <174489489366.31282.15544367638246694854.tip-bot2@tip-bot2>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 13:01:33 -0000
From: "tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker" <tip-bot2@...utronix.de>
To: linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
 "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [tip: perf/core] perf/core: Fix put_ctx() ordering

The following commit has been merged into the perf/core branch of tip:

Commit-ID:     2839f393c69456bc356738e521b2e70b82977f46
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/2839f393c69456bc356738e521b2e70b82977f46
Author:        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
AuthorDate:    Wed, 09 Apr 2025 15:01:12 +02:00
Committer:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CommitterDate: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 14:21:15 +02:00

perf/core: Fix put_ctx() ordering

So there are three situations:

* If perf_event_free_task() has removed all the children from the parent list
  before perf_event_release_kernel() got a chance to even iterate them, then
  it's all good as there is no get_ctx() pending.

* If perf_event_release_kernel() iterates a child event, but it gets freed
  meanwhile by perf_event_free_task() while the mutexes are temporarily
  unlocked, it's all good because while locking again the ctx mutex,
  perf_event_release_kernel() observes TASK_TOMBSTONE.

* But if perf_event_release_kernel() frees the child event before
  perf_event_free_task() got a chance, we may face this scenario:

    perf_event_release_kernel()                                  perf_event_free_task()
    --------------------------                                   ------------------------
    mutex_lock(&event->child_mutex)
    get_ctx(child->ctx)
    mutex_unlock(&event->child_mutex)

    mutex_lock(ctx->mutex)
    mutex_lock(&event->child_mutex)
    perf_remove_from_context(child)
    mutex_unlock(&event->child_mutex)
    mutex_unlock(ctx->mutex)

                                                                 // This lock acquires ctx->refcount == 2
                                                                 // visibility
                                                                 mutex_lock(ctx->mutex)
                                                                 ctx->task = TASK_TOMBSTONE
                                                                 mutex_unlock(ctx->mutex)

                                                                 wait_var_event()
                                                                     // enters prepare_to_wait() since
                                                                     // ctx->refcount == 2
                                                                     // is guaranteed to be seen
                                                                     set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
                                                                     smp_mb()
                                                                     if (ctx->refcount != 1)
                                                                         schedule()
    put_ctx()
       // NOT fully ordered! Only RELEASE semantics
       refcount_dec_and_test()
           atomic_fetch_sub_release()
       // So TASK_TOMBSTONE is not guaranteed to be seen
       if (ctx->task == TASK_TOMBSTONE)
           wake_up_var()

Basically it's a broken store buffer:

    perf_event_release_kernel()                                  perf_event_free_task()
    --------------------------                                   ------------------------
    ctx->task = TASK_TOMBSTONE                                   smp_store_release(&ctx->refcount, ctx->refcount - 1)
    smp_mb()
    READ_ONCE(ctx->refcount)                                     READ_ONCE(ctx->task)

So we need a smp_mb__after_atomic() before looking at ctx->task.

Fixes: 59f3aa4a3ee2 ("perf: Simplify perf_event_free_task() wait")
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/Z_ZvmEhjkAhplCBE@localhost.localdomain
---
 kernel/events/core.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index e4d7a0c..1a19df9 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -1271,9 +1271,10 @@ static void put_ctx(struct perf_event_context *ctx)
 		if (ctx->task && ctx->task != TASK_TOMBSTONE)
 			put_task_struct(ctx->task);
 		call_rcu(&ctx->rcu_head, free_ctx);
-	} else if (ctx->task == TASK_TOMBSTONE) {
-		smp_mb(); /* pairs with wait_var_event() */
-		wake_up_var(&ctx->refcount);
+	} else {
+		smp_mb__after_atomic(); /* pairs with wait_var_event() */
+		if (ctx->task == TASK_TOMBSTONE)
+			wake_up_var(&ctx->refcount);
 	}
 }