From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Yao Kai <yaokai34@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
peterz@infradead.org, dvhart@infradead.org, dave@stgolabs.net,
andrealmeid@igalia.com, liuyongqiang13@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] futex/requeue: Prevent rcuwait use-after-free during requeue PI
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 11:38:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260717093829.K07Gk1tS@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260717084922.4153317-3-yaokai34@huawei.com>
On 2026-07-17 16:49:22 [+0800], Yao Kai wrote:
> On PREEMPT_RT, FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE_PI can trigger a KASAN report:
>
> BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x76/0xe0
> Call Trace:
> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x76/0xe0
> try_to_wake_up+0xab/0x1540
> rcuwait_wake_up+0x39/0x60
> futex_requeue+0x18c3/0x1e10
>
> The futex_q used by futex_wait_requeue_pi() is allocated on the waiter's
> stack. An early wakeup can race with a PI requeue as follows:
>
> waiter requeue task
> ------ ------------
> futex_wait_requeue_pi()
> futex_do_wait()
> schedule()
>
> * timeout/signal wakes waiter *
>
> futex_requeue_pi_wakeup_sync()
> IN_PROGRESS -> WAIT
> rcuwait_wait_event()
> requeue_pi_wake_futex()
> task = READ_ONCE(q->task)
> futex_requeue_pi_complete()
> WAIT -> LOCKED
> return LOCKED
> return
> // q lifetime ends
> rcuwait_wake_up()
>
> futex_requeue_pi_complete() publishes LOCKED before calling
> rcuwait_wake_up(). Once the waiter observes LOCKED, it can return from
> futex_wait_requeue_pi() and let q go out of scope before rcuwait_wake_up()
> reads q->requeue_wait.task and passes the stale pointer to
> try_to_wake_up().
>
> Skip rcuwait_wake_up() for Q_REQUEUE_PI_LOCKED. requeue_pi_wake_futex()
> already saves q->task before publishing LOCKED and wakes the saved task
> afterward.
>
> Fixes: 07d91ef510fb1 ("futex: Prevent requeue_pi() lock nesting issue on RT")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Yao Kai <yaokai34@huawei.com>
> ---
> kernel/futex/requeue.c | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/futex/requeue.c b/kernel/futex/requeue.c
> index abc652b5b2dd..59e587775d9b 100644
> --- a/kernel/futex/requeue.c
> +++ b/kernel/futex/requeue.c
> @@ -155,8 +155,13 @@ static inline void futex_requeue_pi_complete(struct futex_q *q, int locked)
> } while (!atomic_try_cmpxchg(&q->requeue_state, &old, new));
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> - /* If the waiter interleaved with the requeue let it know */
> - if (unlikely(old == Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT))
> + /*
> + * If the waiter interleaved with the requeue, let it know. For LOCKED,
> + * q may already be invalid, so requeue_pi_wake_futex() wakes the saved
> + * task instead.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(old == Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT) &&
> + new != Q_REQUEUE_PI_LOCKED)
> rcuwait_wake_up(&q->requeue_wait);
Your whole assumption is based on the requeue_state in
futex_requeue_pi_wakeup_sync() changes from Q_REQUEUE_PI_IN_PROGRESS to
Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT and the rcuwait_wait_event() does not wait because the
condition becomes true before that happens. So the rcuwait_wake_up()
could access q.requeue_wait which is allocated on behalf of the waiter
which is gone. Certainly possible. But if we skip the wait in thise case
we probably miss the 99% cases where the waiter did wait, no?
This looks similar to commit b549113738e8c ("futex: Prevent
use-after-free during requeue-PI").
> #endif
> }
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-17 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-17 8:49 [PATCH 0/2] futex/requeue: Fix requeue PI races Yao Kai
2026-07-17 8:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] futex/requeue: Fix rtmutex schedule preparation for requeue PI Yao Kai
2026-07-17 8:55 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-20 2:40 ` Yao Kai
2026-07-20 14:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-17 8:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] futex/requeue: Prevent rcuwait use-after-free during " Yao Kai
2026-07-17 9:38 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2026-07-20 2:50 ` Yao Kai
2026-07-20 14:55 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20260717093829.K07Gk1tS@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuyongqiang13@huawei.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=yaokai34@huawei.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome