From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Subject: [patch 1/2] locking/rtmutex: Dont dereference waiter lockless
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:33:12 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210825102453.981720644@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210825101857.420032248@linutronix.de>
The new rt_mutex_spin_on_onwer() loop checks whether the spinning waiter is
still the top waiter on the lock by utilizing rt_mutex_top_waiter(), which
is broken because that function contains a sanity check which dereferences
the top waiter pointer to check whether the waiter belongs to the
lock. That's wrong in the lockless spinwait case:
CPU 0 CPU 1
rt_mutex_lock(lock) rt_mutex_lock(lock);
queue(waiter0)
waiter0 == rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)
rt_mutex_spin_on_onwer(lock, waiter0) { queue(waiter1)
waiter1 == rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)
...
top_waiter = rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)
leftmost = rb_first_cached(&lock->waiters);
-> signal
dequeue(waiter1)
destroy(waiter1)
w = rb_entry(leftmost, ....)
BUG_ON(w->lock != lock) <- UAF
The BUG_ON() is correct for the case where the caller holds lock->wait_lock
which guarantees that the leftmost waiter entry cannot vanish. For the
lockless spinwait case it's broken.
Create a new helper function which avoids the pointer dereference and just
compares the leftmost entry pointer with current's waiter pointer to
validate that currrent is still elegible for spinning.
Fixes: 992caf7f1724 ("locking/rtmutex: Add adaptive spinwait mechanism")
Reported-by: Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 5 +++--
kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h | 13 +++++++++++++
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1329,8 +1329,9 @@ static bool rtmutex_spin_on_owner(struct
* for CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y)
* - the VCPU on which owner runs is preempted
*/
- if (!owner->on_cpu || waiter != rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock) ||
- need_resched() || vcpu_is_preempted(task_cpu(owner))) {
+ if (!owner->on_cpu || need_resched() ||
+ rt_mutex_waiter_is_top_waiter(lock, waiter) ||
+ vcpu_is_preempted(task_cpu(owner))) {
res = false;
break;
}
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
@@ -95,6 +95,19 @@ static inline int rt_mutex_has_waiters(s
return !RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&lock->waiters.rb_root);
}
+/*
+ * Lockless speculative check whether @waiter is still the top waiter on
+ * @lock. This is solely comparing pointers and not derefencing the
+ * leftmost entry which might be about to vanish.
+ */
+static inline bool rt_mutex_waiter_is_top_waiter(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
+ struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
+{
+ struct rb_node *leftmost = rb_first_cached(&lock->waiters);
+
+ return rb_entry(leftmost, struct rt_mutex_waiter, tree_entry) == waiter;
+}
+
static inline struct rt_mutex_waiter *rt_mutex_top_waiter(struct rt_mutex_base *lock)
{
struct rb_node *leftmost = rb_first_cached(&lock->waiters);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-25 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-25 10:33 [patch 0/2] locking/rtmutex: Cure two subtle bugs Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-25 10:33 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2021-08-25 14:17 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/rtmutex: Dont dereference waiter lockless tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-25 10:33 ` [patch 2/2] locking/rtmutex: Dequeue waiter on ww_mutex deadlock Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-25 14:17 ` [tip: locking/core] " tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-25 11:40 ` [patch 0/2] locking/rtmutex: Cure two subtle bugs Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-26 13:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-27 7:56 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-08-27 12:31 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/rtmutex: Return success on deadlock for ww_mutex waiters tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-27 12:31 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/rtmutex: Prevent spurious EDEADLK return caused by ww_mutexes tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210825102453.981720644@linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®