From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: "Dmitry Vyukov" <dvyukov@google.com>,
"Steve Rutherford" <srutherford@google.com>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"KVM list" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kvm: use-after-free in process_srcu
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 09:53:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <84cdf3bd-e2b2-0a42-05d9-2163d3535a2f@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170117203436.GC5238@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 17/01/2017 21:34, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Do any of your callback functions invoke call_srcu()? (Hey, I have to ask!)
No, we only use synchronize_srcu and synchronize_srcu_expedited, so our
only callback comes from there.
>>>> From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>>>> Subject: [PATCH] srcu: wait for all callbacks before deeming SRCU "cleaned up"
>>>>
>>>> Even though there are no concurrent readers, it is possible that the
>>>> work item is queued for delayed processing when cleanup_srcu_struct is
>>>> called. The work item needs to be flushed before returning, or a
>>>> use-after-free can ensue.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, because of SRCU's two-phase algorithm it may take up to
>>>> two executions of srcu_advance_batches before all callbacks are invoked.
>>>> This can happen if the first flush_delayed_work happens as follows
>>>>
>>>> srcu_read_lock
>>>> process_srcu
>>>> srcu_advance_batches
>>>> ...
>>>> if (!try_check_zero(sp, idx^1, trycount))
>>>> // there is a reader
>>>> return;
>>>> srcu_invoke_callbacks
>>>> ...
>>>> srcu_read_unlock
>>>> cleanup_srcu_struct
>>>> flush_delayed_work
>>>> srcu_reschedule
>>>> queue_delayed_work
>>>>
>>>> Now flush_delayed_work returns but srcu_reschedule will *not* have cleared
>>>> sp->running to false.
>
> But srcu_reschedule() sets sp->running to false if there are no callbacks.
> And at that point, there had better be no callbacks.
There must be no callbacks in batch_queue and in batch_check0, and of
course srcu_invoke_callbacks will have emptied batch_done as well.
However, I'm not sure that batch_check1 is always empty after the first
flush_delayed_work *if there's no srcu_barrier* in the caller.
srcu_advance_batches's second call to try_check_zero could have failed,
and then srcu_reschedule will requeue the work item to advance
batch_check1 into batch_done.
If this is incorrect, then one flush_delayed_work is enough. If it is
correct, the possible alternatives are:
* srcu_barrier in the caller, flush_delayed_work+WARN_ON(sp->running) in
cleanup_srcu_struct. I strongly dislike this one---because we don't use
call_srcu at all, there should be no reason to use srcu_barrier in KVM
code. Plus I think all other users have the same issue.
* srcu_barrier+flush_delayed_work+WARN_ON(sp->running) in
cleanup_srcu_struct
* flush_delayed_work+flush_delayed_work+WARN_ON(sp->running) in
cleanup_srcu_struct
* while(flush_delayed_work) in cleanup_srcu_struct
* "while(sp->running) flush_delayed_work" in cleanup_srcu_struct
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-18 8:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-11 6:46 Dmitry Vyukov
2016-12-11 8:40 ` Vegard Nossum
2016-12-11 8:49 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-13 3:30 ` Steve Rutherford
2017-01-13 9:19 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-15 17:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-16 21:34 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-16 21:48 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-01-17 9:47 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-17 9:56 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-17 11:08 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-01-17 11:13 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-17 12:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-01-17 20:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-18 8:53 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2017-01-18 22:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-19 9:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-01-19 21:52 ` Paul McKenney
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=84cdf3bd-e2b2-0a42-05d9-2163d3535a2f@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=srutherford@google.com \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.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