netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: sched: act_ife: disable bh when taking ife_mod

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: <CAM_iQpXJn2sQoLB=sah9vDd0DtAm10HpwnUP4p4EEb6ExGaRng@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Aug 2018 12:16:52 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: sched: act_ife: disable bh when taking ife_mod_lock

On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 10:20 AM Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com> wrote:
>
> Lockdep reports deadlock for following locking scenario in ife action:
>
> Task one:
> 1) Executes ife action update.
> 2) Takes tcfa_lock.
> 3) Waits on ife_mod_lock which is already taken by task two.
>
> Task two:
>
> 1) Executes any path that obtains ife_mod_lock without disabling bh (any
> path that takes ife_mod_lock while holding tcfa_lock has bh disabled) like
> loading a meta module, or creating new action.
> 2) Takes ife_mod_lock.
> 3) Task is preempted by rate estimator timer.
> 4) Timer callback waits on tcfa_lock which is taken by task one.
>
> In described case tasks deadlock because they take same two locks in
> different order. To prevent potential deadlock reported by lockdep, always
> disable bh when obtaining ife_mod_lock.

Your fix doesn't make sense, because what ife_mod_lock protects
is absolutely not touched in BH context, they have no race.

The only time you need tcfa_lock is when adding it to ->metalist:

list_add_tail(&mi->metalist, &ife->metalist);

when it already exists.

Which means you can just take tcfa_lock after taking ife_mod_lock.