netdev - Re: [PATCH] rcu: fix a race in hlist_nulls_for_each_entry

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]

Date:	Tue, 21 May 2013 19:51:10 +0400
From:	Roman Gushchin <klamm@...dex-team.ru>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	zhmurov@...dex-team.ru, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: fix a race in hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu macro

On 21.05.2013 19:16, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 18:47 +0400, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>> On 21.05.2013 17:44, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 05:09 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -#define hlist_nulls_first_rcu(head) \
>>>>> -	(*((struct hlist_nulls_node __rcu __force **)&(head)->first))
>>>>> +#define hlist_nulls_first_rcu(head)			\
>>>>> +	(*((struct hlist_nulls_node __rcu __force **)	\
>>>>> +	   &((volatile typeof(*head) *)head)->first))
>>>>
>>>> Why not use ACCESS_ONCE() or (better) rcu_dereference_raw() here?
>>>
>>> More exactly we have :
>>>
>>> #define list_entry_rcu(ptr, type, member) \
>>>           ({typeof (*ptr) __rcu *__ptr = (typeof (*ptr) __rcu __force *)ptr; \
>>>            container_of((typeof(ptr))rcu_dereference_raw(__ptr), type, member); \
>>>           })
>>>
>>> #define list_for_each_entry_rcu(pos, head, member) \
>>>           for (pos = list_entry_rcu((head)->next, typeof(*pos), member); \
>>>                   &pos->member != (head); \
>>>                   pos = list_entry_rcu(pos->member.next, typeof(*pos), member))
>>> << and >>
>>>
>>> #define hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(tpos, pos, head, member)                 \
>>>           for (pos = rcu_dereference_raw(hlist_nulls_first_rcu(head));            \
>>>                   (!is_a_nulls(pos)) &&                                           \
>>>                   ({ tpos = hlist_nulls_entry(pos, typeof(*tpos), member); 1; }); \
>>>                   pos = rcu_dereference_raw(hlist_nulls_next_rcu(pos)))
>>>
>>> We need to change hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu() to use same construct,
>>> so that the rcu_dereference_raw() is performed at the right place.
>>
>> No.
>>
>> This code has the same mistake: it is rcu_dereference_raw(head->first),
>> so there is nothing that prevents gcc to store the (head->first) value
>> in a register.
>
> Please read again what I wrote, you misundertood.
>
> hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu() should use same construct than
> list_for_each_entry_rcu(), and not use rcu_dereference_raw()
>
> Is that clear, or do you want me to send the patch ?

If you think, that it will solve the problem, please, send a patch. I 
think, you are wrong here.
If you think only that it will look better, I agree.

Regards,
Roman

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html