| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 20:54:31 +0800
From: liuyacan@...p.netease.com
To: wenjia@...ux.ibm.com, alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com,
kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, liuyacan@...p.netease.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com, ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
wintera@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4] net/smc: Fix possible access to freed memory in link clear
> >>> From: Yacan Liu <liuyacan@...p.netease.com>
> >>>
> >>> After modifying the QP to the Error state, all RX WR would be completed
> >>> with WC in IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR status. Current implementation does not
> >>> wait for it is done, but destroy the QP and free the link group directly.
> >>> So there is a risk that accessing the freed memory in tasklet context.
> >>>
> >>> Here is a crash example:
> >>>
> >>> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffffffff8f220860
> >>> #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode
> >>> #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page
> >>> PGD f7300e067 P4D f7300e067 PUD f7300f063 PMD 8c4e45063 PTE 800ffff08c9df060
> >>> Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP PTI
> >>> CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G S OE 5.10.0-0607+ #23
> >>> Hardware name: Inspur NF5280M4/YZMB-00689-101, BIOS 4.1.20 07/09/2018
> >>> RIP: 0010:native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x176/0x1b0
> >>> Code: f3 90 48 8b 32 48 85 f6 74 f6 eb d5 c1 ee 12 83 e0 03 83 ee 01 48 c1 e0 05 48 63 f6 48 05 00 c8 02 00 48 03 04 f5 00 09 98 8e <48> 89 10 8b 42 08 85 c0 75 09 f3 90 8b 42 08 85 c0 74 f7 48 8b 32
> >>> RSP: 0018:ffffb3b6c001ebd8 EFLAGS: 00010086
> >>> RAX: ffffffff8f220860 RBX: 0000000000000246 RCX: 0000000000080000
> >>> RDX: ffff91db1f86c800 RSI: 000000000000173c RDI: ffff91db62bace00
> >>> RBP: ffff91db62bacc00 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: c00000010000028b
> >>> R10: 0000000000055198 R11: ffffb3b6c001ea58 R12: ffff91db80e05010
> >>> R13: 000000000000000a R14: 0000000000000006 R15: 0000000000000040
> >>> FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff91db1f840000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> >>> CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> >>> CR2: ffffffff8f220860 CR3: 00000001f9580004 CR4: 00000000003706e0
> >>> DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> >>> DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> >>> Call Trace:
> >>> <IRQ>
> >>> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x30/0x40
> >>> mlx5_ib_poll_cq+0x4c/0xc50 [mlx5_ib]
> >>> smc_wr_rx_tasklet_fn+0x56/0xa0 [smc]
> >>> tasklet_action_common.isra.21+0x66/0x100
> >>> __do_softirq+0xd5/0x29c
> >>> asm_call_irq_on_stack+0x12/0x20
> >>> </IRQ>
> >>> do_softirq_own_stack+0x37/0x40
> >>> irq_exit_rcu+0x9d/0xa0
> >>> sysvec_call_function_single+0x34/0x80
> >>> asm_sysvec_call_function_single+0x12/0x20
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: bd4ad57718cc ("smc: initialize IB transport incl. PD, MR, QP, CQ, event, WR")
> >>> Signed-off-by: Yacan Liu <liuyacan@...p.netease.com>
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Chagen in v4:
> >>> -- Remove the rx_drain flag because smc_wr_rx_post() may not have been called.
> >>> -- Remove timeout.
> >>> Change in v3:
> >>> -- Tune commit message (Signed-Off tag, Fixes tag).
> >>> Tune code to avoid column length exceeding.
> >>> Change in v2:
> >>> -- Fix some compile warnings and errors.
> >>> ---
> >>> net/smc/smc_core.c | 2 ++
> >>> net/smc/smc_core.h | 2 ++
> >>> net/smc/smc_wr.c | 9 +++++++++
> >>> net/smc/smc_wr.h | 1 +
> >>> 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_core.c b/net/smc/smc_core.c
> >>> index ff49a11f5..f92a916e9 100644
> >>> --- a/net/smc/smc_core.c
> >>> +++ b/net/smc/smc_core.c
> >>> @@ -757,6 +757,7 @@ int smcr_link_init(struct smc_link_group *lgr, struct smc_link *lnk,
> >>> lnk->lgr = lgr;
> >>> smc_lgr_hold(lgr); /* lgr_put in smcr_link_clear() */
> >>> lnk->link_idx = link_idx;
> >>> + lnk->wr_rx_id_compl = 0;
> >>> smc_ibdev_cnt_inc(lnk);
> >>> smcr_copy_dev_info_to_link(lnk);
> >>> atomic_set(&lnk->conn_cnt, 0);
> >>> @@ -1269,6 +1270,7 @@ void smcr_link_clear(struct smc_link *lnk, bool log)
> >>> smcr_buf_unmap_lgr(lnk);
> >>> smcr_rtoken_clear_link(lnk);
> >>> smc_ib_modify_qp_error(lnk);
> >>> + smc_wr_drain_cq(lnk);
> >>> smc_wr_free_link(lnk);
> >>> smc_ib_destroy_queue_pair(lnk);
> >>> smc_ib_dealloc_protection_domain(lnk);
> >>> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_core.h b/net/smc/smc_core.h
> >>> index fe8b524ad..285f9bd8e 100644
> >>> --- a/net/smc/smc_core.h
> >>> +++ b/net/smc/smc_core.h
> >>> @@ -115,8 +115,10 @@ struct smc_link {
> >>> dma_addr_t wr_rx_dma_addr; /* DMA address of wr_rx_bufs */
> >>> dma_addr_t wr_rx_v2_dma_addr; /* DMA address of v2 rx buf*/
> >>> u64 wr_rx_id; /* seq # of last recv WR */
> >>> + u64 wr_rx_id_compl; /* seq # of last completed WR */
> >>> u32 wr_rx_cnt; /* number of WR recv buffers */
> >>> unsigned long wr_rx_tstamp; /* jiffies when last buf rx */
> >>> + wait_queue_head_t wr_rx_empty_wait; /* wait for RQ empty */
> >>>
> >>> struct ib_reg_wr wr_reg; /* WR register memory region */
> >>> wait_queue_head_t wr_reg_wait; /* wait for wr_reg result */
> >>> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_wr.c b/net/smc/smc_wr.c
> >>> index 26f8f240d..bc8793803 100644
> >>> --- a/net/smc/smc_wr.c
> >>> +++ b/net/smc/smc_wr.c
> >>> @@ -454,6 +454,7 @@ static inline void smc_wr_rx_process_cqes(struct ib_wc wc[], int num)
> >>>
> >>> for (i = 0; i < num; i++) {
> >>> link = wc[i].qp->qp_context;
> >>> + link->wr_rx_id_compl = wc[i].wr_id;
> >>> if (wc[i].status == IB_WC_SUCCESS) {
> >>> link->wr_rx_tstamp = jiffies;
> >>> smc_wr_rx_demultiplex(&wc[i]);
> >>> @@ -465,6 +466,8 @@ static inline void smc_wr_rx_process_cqes(struct ib_wc wc[], int num)
> >>> case IB_WC_RNR_RETRY_EXC_ERR:
> >>> case IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR:
> >>> smcr_link_down_cond_sched(link);
> >>> + if (link->wr_rx_id_compl == link->wr_rx_id)
> >>> + wake_up(&link->wr_rx_empty_wait);
> >>> break;
> >>> default:
> >>> smc_wr_rx_post(link); /* refill WR RX */
> >>> @@ -631,6 +634,11 @@ static void smc_wr_init_sge(struct smc_link *lnk)
> >>> lnk->wr_reg.access = IB_ACCESS_LOCAL_WRITE | IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_WRITE;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> +void smc_wr_drain_cq(struct smc_link *lnk)
> >>> +{
> >>> + wait_event(lnk->wr_rx_empty_wait, lnk->wr_rx_id_compl == lnk->wr_rx_id);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> void smc_wr_free_link(struct smc_link *lnk)
> >>> {
> >>> struct ib_device *ibdev;
> >>> @@ -889,6 +897,7 @@ int smc_wr_create_link(struct smc_link *lnk)
> >>> atomic_set(&lnk->wr_tx_refcnt, 0);
> >>> init_waitqueue_head(&lnk->wr_reg_wait);
> >>> atomic_set(&lnk->wr_reg_refcnt, 0);
> >>> + init_waitqueue_head(&lnk->wr_rx_empty_wait);
> >>> return rc;
> >>>
> >>> dma_unmap:
> >>> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_wr.h b/net/smc/smc_wr.h
> >>> index a54e90a11..5ca5086ae 100644
> >>> --- a/net/smc/smc_wr.h
> >>> +++ b/net/smc/smc_wr.h
> >>> @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ static inline int smc_wr_rx_post(struct smc_link *link)
> >>> int smc_wr_create_link(struct smc_link *lnk);
> >>> int smc_wr_alloc_link_mem(struct smc_link *lnk);
> >>> int smc_wr_alloc_lgr_mem(struct smc_link_group *lgr);
> >>> +void smc_wr_drain_cq(struct smc_link *lnk);
> >>> void smc_wr_free_link(struct smc_link *lnk);
> >>> void smc_wr_free_link_mem(struct smc_link *lnk);
> >>> void smc_wr_free_lgr_mem(struct smc_link_group *lgr);
> >>
> >> Thank you @Yacan for the effort to improve our code! And Thank you @Tony
> >> for such valuable suggestions and testing!
> >> I like the modification of this version. However, this is not a fix
> >> patch to upstream, since the patches "[PATCH net-next v2 00/10] optimize
> >> the parallelism of SMC-R connections" are still not applied. My
> >> sugguestions:
> >> - Please talk to the author (D. Wythe <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>) of
> >> those patches I mentioned above, and ask if he can take your patch as a
> >> part of the patch serie
> >> - Fix patches should go to net-next
> >> - Please send always send your new version separately, rather than as
> >> reply to your previous version. That makes people confused.
> >
> > @Wenjia, Thanks a lot for your suggestions and guidance !
> >
> > @D. Wythe, Can you include this patch in your series of patches if it is
> > convenient?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yacan
> >
> One point I was confused, fixes should goto net, sorry!
Well, @D. Wythe, please ignore the above emails, sorry!
Regards,
Yacan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists