| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <dca36c4b-bbf5-b215-faa9-1992240f2b69@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 09:44:39 -0800
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
syzbot <syzbot+122b5421d14e68f29cd1@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
CC: <andriin@...com>, <ast@...nel.org>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
<daniel@...earbox.net>, <kafai@...com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<songliubraving@...com>, <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: possible deadlock in bpf_lru_push_free
On 2/16/20 9:23 PM, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 Feb 2020 04:17:09 -0800
>> syzbot has found a reproducer for the following crash on:
>>
>> HEAD commit: 2019fc96 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/g..
>> git tree: net
>> console output: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__syzkaller.appspot.com_x_log.txt-3Fx-3D1358bb11e00000&d=DwIDAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=npe_gMkFnfxt6F5dGLs6zsNHWkYM30LkMFOk1_ZR1w8&s=zrgWcBnddWkMWG2zm-9nC8EwvHMsuqw_-EEXwl23XLg&e=
>> kernel config: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__syzkaller.appspot.com_x_.config-3Fx-3D735296e4dd620b10&d=DwIDAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=npe_gMkFnfxt6F5dGLs6zsNHWkYM30LkMFOk1_ZR1w8&s=kbT6Yw89JDoIWSQtlLJ7sjyNoP2Ulud27GNorna1zQk&e=
>> dashboard link: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__syzkaller.appspot.com_bug-3Fextid-3D122b5421d14e68f29cd1&d=DwIDAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=npe_gMkFnfxt6F5dGLs6zsNHWkYM30LkMFOk1_ZR1w8&s=U3pdUmrcroaeNsJ9DgFbTlvftQUCUcJ1CW_0NxS8yGA&e=
>> compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
>> syz repro: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__syzkaller.appspot.com_x_repro.syz-3Fx-3D14b67d6ee00000&d=DwIDAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=npe_gMkFnfxt6F5dGLs6zsNHWkYM30LkMFOk1_ZR1w8&s=TuSfjosRFQW3ArpQwikTtx-dgLLBSMgJfVKtUltqQBM&e=
>>
>> IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
>> Reported-by: syzbot+122b5421d14e68f29cd1@...kaller.appspotmail.com
>>
>> ======================================================
>> WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>> 5.6.0-rc1-syzkaller #0 Not tainted
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> syz-executor.4/13544 is trying to acquire lock:
>> ffffe8ffffcba0b8 (&loc_l->lock){....}, at: bpf_common_lru_push_free kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:516 [inline]
>> ffffe8ffffcba0b8 (&loc_l->lock){....}, at: bpf_lru_push_free+0x250/0x5b0 kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:555
>>
>> but task is already holding lock:
>> ffff888094985960 (&htab->buckets[i].lock){....}, at: __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch+0x617/0x1540 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1322
>>
>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>
>>
>> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>>
>> -> #2 (&htab->buckets[i].lock){....}:
>> __raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:110 [inline]
>> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x95/0xcd kernel/locking/spinlock.c:159
>> htab_lru_map_delete_node+0xce/0x2f0 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:593
>> __bpf_lru_list_shrink_inactive kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:220 [inline]
>> __bpf_lru_list_shrink+0xf9/0x470 kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:266
>> bpf_lru_list_pop_free_to_local kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:340 [inline]
>> bpf_common_lru_pop_free kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:447 [inline]
>> bpf_lru_pop_free+0x87c/0x1670 kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:499
>> prealloc_lru_pop+0x2c/0xa0 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:132
>> __htab_lru_percpu_map_update_elem+0x67e/0xa90 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1069
>> bpf_percpu_hash_update+0x16e/0x210 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1585
>> bpf_map_update_value.isra.0+0x2d7/0x8e0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:181
>> generic_map_update_batch+0x41f/0x610 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:1319
>> bpf_map_do_batch+0x3f5/0x510 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3348
>> __do_sys_bpf+0x9b7/0x41e0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3460
>> __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355 [inline]
>> __x64_sys_bpf+0x73/0xb0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355
>> do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x790 arch/x86/entry/common.c:294
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>>
>> -> #1 (&l->lock){....}:
>> __raw_spin_lock include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:142 [inline]
>> _raw_spin_lock+0x2f/0x40 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:151
>> bpf_lru_list_pop_free_to_local kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:325 [inline]
>> bpf_common_lru_pop_free kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:447 [inline]
>> bpf_lru_pop_free+0x67f/0x1670 kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:499
>> prealloc_lru_pop+0x2c/0xa0 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:132
>> __htab_lru_percpu_map_update_elem+0x67e/0xa90 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1069
>> bpf_percpu_hash_update+0x16e/0x210 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1585
>> bpf_map_update_value.isra.0+0x2d7/0x8e0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:181
>> generic_map_update_batch+0x41f/0x610 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:1319
>> bpf_map_do_batch+0x3f5/0x510 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3348
>> __do_sys_bpf+0x9b7/0x41e0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3460
>> __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355 [inline]
>> __x64_sys_bpf+0x73/0xb0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355
>> do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x790 arch/x86/entry/common.c:294
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>>
>> -> #0 (&loc_l->lock){....}:
>> check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2475 [inline]
>> check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2580 [inline]
>> validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2970 [inline]
>> __lock_acquire+0x2596/0x4a00 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3954
>> lock_acquire+0x190/0x410 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4484
>> __raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:110 [inline]
>> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x95/0xcd kernel/locking/spinlock.c:159
>> bpf_common_lru_push_free kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:516 [inline]
>> bpf_lru_push_free+0x250/0x5b0 kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:555
>> __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch+0x8d4/0x1540 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1374
>> htab_lru_map_lookup_and_delete_batch+0x34/0x40 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1491
>> bpf_map_do_batch+0x3f5/0x510 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3348
>> __do_sys_bpf+0x1f7d/0x41e0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3456
>> __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355 [inline]
>> __x64_sys_bpf+0x73/0xb0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355
>> do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x790 arch/x86/entry/common.c:294
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>>
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>>
>> Chain exists of:
>> &loc_l->lock --> &l->lock --> &htab->buckets[i].lock
>>
>> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>
>> CPU0 CPU1
>> ---- ----
>> lock(&htab->buckets[i].lock);
>> lock(&l->lock);
>> lock(&htab->buckets[i].lock);
>> lock(&loc_l->lock);
>>
>> *** DEADLOCK ***
>>
>> 2 locks held by syz-executor.4/13544:
>> #0: ffffffff89bac240 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch+0x54b/0x1540 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1308
>> #1: ffff888094985960 (&htab->buckets[i].lock){....}, at: __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch+0x617/0x1540 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1322
>>
>> stack backtrace:
>> CPU: 0 PID: 13544 Comm: syz-executor.4 Not tainted 5.6.0-rc1-syzkaller #0
>> Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 01/01/2011
>> Call Trace:
>> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:77 [inline]
>> dump_stack+0x197/0x210 lib/dump_stack.c:118
>> print_circular_bug.isra.0.cold+0x163/0x172 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1684
>> check_noncircular+0x32e/0x3e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1808
>> check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2475 [inline]
>> check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2580 [inline]
>> validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2970 [inline]
>> __lock_acquire+0x2596/0x4a00 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3954
>> lock_acquire+0x190/0x410 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4484
>> __raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:110 [inline]
>> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x95/0xcd kernel/locking/spinlock.c:159
>> bpf_common_lru_push_free kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:516 [inline]
>> bpf_lru_push_free+0x250/0x5b0 kernel/bpf/bpf_lru_list.c:555
>> __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch+0x8d4/0x1540 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1374
>> htab_lru_map_lookup_and_delete_batch+0x34/0x40 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c:1491
>> bpf_map_do_batch+0x3f5/0x510 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3348
>> __do_sys_bpf+0x1f7d/0x41e0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3456
>> __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355 [inline]
>> __x64_sys_bpf+0x73/0xb0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3355
>> do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x790 arch/x86/entry/common.c:294
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>
> Reclaim hash table elememt outside bucket lock.
Thanks for the following patch. Yes, we do have an potential issue
with the above deadlock if LRU hash map is not preallocated.
I am not a RCU expert, but maybe you could you help clarify
one thing below?
>
> --- a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> @@ -1259,6 +1259,7 @@ __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(struc
> u64 elem_map_flags, map_flags;
> struct hlist_nulls_head *head;
> struct hlist_nulls_node *n;
> + struct hlist_nulls_node *node_to_free = NULL;
> unsigned long flags;
> struct htab_elem *l;
> struct bucket *b;
> @@ -1370,9 +1371,10 @@ again_nocopy:
> }
> if (do_delete) {
> hlist_nulls_del_rcu(&l->hash_node);
> - if (is_lru_map)
> - bpf_lru_push_free(&htab->lru, &l->lru_node);
> - else
> + if (is_lru_map) {
> + l->hash_node.next = node_to_free;
> + node_to_free = &l->hash_node;
Here, we change "next" pointer. How does this may impact the existing
parallel map lookup which does not need to take bucket pointer?
> + } else
> free_htab_elem(htab, l);
> }
> dst_key += key_size;
> @@ -1380,6 +1382,12 @@ again_nocopy:
> }
>
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&b->lock, flags);
> +
> + while (node_to_free) {
> + l = container_of(node_to_free, struct htab_elem, hash_node);
> + node_to_free = node_to_free->next;
> + bpf_lru_push_free(&htab->lru, &l->lru_node);
> + }
> /* If we are not copying data, we can go to next bucket and avoid
> * unlocking the rcu.
> */
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists