From: Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>
To: Chenweilong <chenweilong@huawei.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc: "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"dvyukov@google.com" <dvyukov@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] kernel/fork.c: annotate data races for copy_process
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:19:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b8346c8-c3b8-b0bd-b925-9545aa3482f9@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AB5DF7CCD2A48B4A97860D5EDCA2B71D94AA8AEC@DGGEMM528-MBS.china.huawei.com>
On 2020/6/17 17:08, Chenweilong wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 11:08:01AM +0800, Weilong Chen wrote:
>>> The check is only there to stop root fork bombs.
>>>
>>> BUG: KCSAN: data-race in copy_process / copy_process
>>>
>>> write to 0xffffffff86f87d20 of 4 bytes by task 7121 on cpu 5:
>>> copy_process+0x2e1a/0x3af0 kernel/fork.c:2285
>>> _do_fork+0xf7/0x790 kernel/fork.c:2430
>>> __do_sys_clone+0xf9/0x130 kernel/fork.c:2585 __se_sys_clone
>>> kernel/fork.c:2566 [inline]
>>> __x64_sys_clone+0x6c/0x80 kernel/fork.c:2566
>>> do_syscall_64+0xc7/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:295
>>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>>>
>>> read to 0xffffffff86f87d20 of 4 bytes by task 7125 on cpu 3:
>>> copy_process+0x9eb/0x3af0 kernel/fork.c:1967
>>> _do_fork+0xf7/0x790 kernel/fork.c:2430
>>> __do_sys_clone+0xf9/0x130 kernel/fork.c:2585 __se_sys_clone
>>> kernel/fork.c:2566 [inline]
>>> __x64_sys_clone+0x6c/0x80 kernel/fork.c:2566
>>> do_syscall_64+0xc7/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:295
>>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Weilong Chen <chenweilong@huawei.com>
>>
>> Plumbing data_race() in there just to taper over this seems ugly.
>> Before we do that we should probably simply make nr_threads atomic_t.
> Will using atomic_t cause performance degradation ? I don’t know why atomic was not used in the beginning.
>
>> Also, where's the link to the syzbot/kcsan report? Or did you get this report from somewhere else?
> I got this from local test.
There is a comment just above the if statement to explain this race:
/*
* If multiple threads are within copy_process(), then this check
* triggers too late. This doesn't hurt, the check is only there
* to stop root fork bombs.
*/
This race won't go away by making nr_threads atomic, because I think it is
tasklist_lock that protects nr_thread.
Adding data_race() here I think makes the code more readable, as a supplementary
to the code comment.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-17 9:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-17 9:08 Chenweilong
2020-06-17 9:19 ` Zefan Li [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-06-09 3:08 Weilong Chen
2020-06-09 10:28 ` Christian Brauner
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=9b8346c8-c3b8-b0bd-b925-9545aa3482f9@huawei.com \
--to=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chenweilong@huawei.com \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®