netdev - Re: [syzbot] [kvm?] [net?] [virt?] general protection fault in vhost_work

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: <bbe697b6-dd9e-5a8d-21c5-315ab59f0456@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 11:27:12 -0500
From: Mike Christie <michael.christie@...cle.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        syzbot <syzbot+d0d442c22fa8db45ff0e@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        jasowang@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, stefanha@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [kvm?] [net?] [virt?] general protection fault in
 vhost_work_queue

On 5/31/23 10:15 AM, Mike Christie wrote:
>>> rcu would work for your case and for what Jason had requested.
>> Yeah, so you already have some patches?
>>
>> Do you want to send it to solve this problem?
>>
> Yeah, I'll break them out and send them later today when I can retest
> rebased patches.
> 

Just one question. Do you core vhost developers consider RCU more complex
or switching to READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE? I am asking because for this immediate
regression fix we could just switch to the latter like below to just fix
the crash if we think that is more simple.

I think RCU is just a little more complex/invasive because it will have the
extra synchronize_rcu calls.


diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
index a92af08e7864..03fd47a22a73 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
+++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ void vhost_dev_flush(struct vhost_dev *dev)
 {
 	struct vhost_flush_struct flush;
 
-	if (dev->worker) {
+	if (READ_ONCE(dev->worker.vtsk)) {
 		init_completion(&flush.wait_event);
 		vhost_work_init(&flush.work, vhost_flush_work);
 
@@ -247,7 +247,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_dev_flush);
 
 void vhost_work_queue(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_work *work)
 {
-	if (!dev->worker)
+	struct vhost_task *vtsk = READ_ONCE(dev->worker.vtsk);
+
+	if (!vtsk)
 		return;
 
 	if (!test_and_set_bit(VHOST_WORK_QUEUED, &work->flags)) {
@@ -255,8 +257,8 @@ void vhost_work_queue(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_work *work)
 		 * sure it was not in the list.
 		 * test_and_set_bit() implies a memory barrier.
 		 */
-		llist_add(&work->node, &dev->worker->work_list);
-		wake_up_process(dev->worker->vtsk->task);
+		llist_add(&work->node, &dev->worker.work_list);
+		wake_up_process(vtsk->task);
 	}
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_work_queue);
@@ -264,7 +266,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_work_queue);
 /* A lockless hint for busy polling code to exit the loop */
 bool vhost_has_work(struct vhost_dev *dev)
 {
-	return dev->worker && !llist_empty(&dev->worker->work_list);
+	return !llist_empty(&dev->worker.work_list);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_has_work);
 
@@ -468,7 +470,7 @@ void vhost_dev_init(struct vhost_dev *dev,
 	dev->umem = NULL;
 	dev->iotlb = NULL;
 	dev->mm = NULL;
-	dev->worker = NULL;
+	memset(&dev->worker, 0, sizeof(dev->worker));
 	dev->iov_limit = iov_limit;
 	dev->weight = weight;
 	dev->byte_weight = byte_weight;
@@ -542,46 +544,38 @@ static void vhost_detach_mm(struct vhost_dev *dev)
 
 static void vhost_worker_free(struct vhost_dev *dev)
 {
-	struct vhost_worker *worker = dev->worker;
+	struct vhost_task *vtsk = READ_ONCE(dev->worker.vtsk);
 
-	if (!worker)
+	if (!vtsk)
 		return;
 
-	dev->worker = NULL;
-	WARN_ON(!llist_empty(&worker->work_list));
-	vhost_task_stop(worker->vtsk);
-	kfree(worker);
+	vhost_task_stop(vtsk);
+	WARN_ON(!llist_empty(&dev->worker.work_list));
+	WRITE_ONCE(dev->worker.vtsk, NULL);
 }
 
 static int vhost_worker_create(struct vhost_dev *dev)
 {
-	struct vhost_worker *worker;
 	struct vhost_task *vtsk;
 	char name[TASK_COMM_LEN];
 	int ret;
 
-	worker = kzalloc(sizeof(*worker), GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
-	if (!worker)
-		return -ENOMEM;
-
-	dev->worker = worker;
-	worker->kcov_handle = kcov_common_handle();
-	init_llist_head(&worker->work_list);
+	dev->worker.kcov_handle = kcov_common_handle();
+	init_llist_head(&dev->worker.work_list);
 	snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "vhost-%d", current->pid);
 
-	vtsk = vhost_task_create(vhost_worker, worker, name);
+	vtsk = vhost_task_create(vhost_worker, &dev->worker, name);
 	if (!vtsk) {
 		ret = -ENOMEM;
 		goto free_worker;
 	}
 
-	worker->vtsk = vtsk;
+	WRITE_ONCE(dev->worker.vtsk, vtsk);
 	vhost_task_start(vtsk);
 	return 0;
 
 free_worker:
-	kfree(worker);
-	dev->worker = NULL;
+	WRITE_ONCE(dev->worker.vtsk, NULL);
 	return ret;
 }
 
diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.h b/drivers/vhost/vhost.h
index 0308638cdeee..305ec8593d46 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.h
+++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.h
@@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ struct vhost_dev {
 	struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs;
 	int nvqs;
 	struct eventfd_ctx *log_ctx;
-	struct vhost_worker *worker;
+	struct vhost_worker worker;
 	struct vhost_iotlb *umem;
 	struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb;
 	spinlock_t iotlb_lock;