From: Nikolay Borisov <n.borisov.lkml@gmail.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>, avagin <avagin@openvz.org>,
serge@hallyn.com, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: namespace: deadlock in dec_pid_namespaces
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 00:44:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fba89f51-5db7-a6e2-2715-eee120146b9e@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877f5py5c2.fsf@xmission.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 986 bytes --]
On 20.01.2017 20:05, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Nikolay Borisov <n.borisov.lkml@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 20.01.2017 15:07, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I've got the following deadlock report while running syzkaller fuzzer
>>> on eec0d3d065bfcdf9cd5f56dd2a36b94d12d32297 of linux-next (on odroid
>>> device if it matters):
>
> I am puzzled I thought we had fixed this with:
> add7c65ca426 ("pid: fix lockdep deadlock warning due to ucount_lock")
> But apparently not. We just moved it from hardirq to softirq context. Bah.
>
> Thank you very much for the report.
>
> Nikolay can you make your change use spinlock_irq? And have put_ucounts
> do spin_lock_irqsave? That way we just don't care where we call this.
Like the one attached? I haven't really taken careful look as to whether
the function where _irq versions do fiddle with irq state, since this
might cause a problem if we unconditionally enable them.
>
> I a tired of being clever.
>
> Eric
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-userns-Make-ucounts-lock-softirq-safe.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2488 bytes --]
>From 0aa66c85afdac0cd07fabdf899c173c6dca2b6e7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nikolay Borisov <n.borisov.lkml@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 15:21:35 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] userns: Make ucounts lock softirq-safe
The ucounts_lock is being used to protect various ucounts lifecycle
management functionalities. However, those services can also be invoked
when a pidns is being freed in an RCU callback (e.g. softirq context).
This can lead to deadlocks. There were already efforts trying to
prevent similar deadlocks in add7c65ca426 ("pid: fix lockdep deadlock
warning due to ucount_lock"), however they just moved the context
from hardirq to softrq. Fix this issue once and for all by explictly
making the lock disable irqs altogether.
Fixes: add7c65ca426 ("pid: fix lockdep deadlock warning due to ucount_lock")
Link: https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2426637.html
Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <n.borisov.lkml@gmail.com>
---
kernel/ucount.c | 14 ++++++++------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/ucount.c b/kernel/ucount.c
index b4aaee935b3e..68716403b261 100644
--- a/kernel/ucount.c
+++ b/kernel/ucount.c
@@ -132,10 +132,10 @@ static struct ucounts *get_ucounts(struct user_namespace *ns, kuid_t uid)
struct hlist_head *hashent = ucounts_hashentry(ns, uid);
struct ucounts *ucounts, *new;
- spin_lock(&ucounts_lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&ucounts_lock);
ucounts = find_ucounts(ns, uid, hashent);
if (!ucounts) {
- spin_unlock(&ucounts_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&ucounts_lock);
new = kzalloc(sizeof(*new), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!new)
@@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ static struct ucounts *get_ucounts(struct user_namespace *ns, kuid_t uid)
new->uid = uid;
atomic_set(&new->count, 0);
- spin_lock(&ucounts_lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&ucounts_lock);
ucounts = find_ucounts(ns, uid, hashent);
if (ucounts) {
kfree(new);
@@ -156,16 +156,18 @@ static struct ucounts *get_ucounts(struct user_namespace *ns, kuid_t uid)
}
if (!atomic_add_unless(&ucounts->count, 1, INT_MAX))
ucounts = NULL;
- spin_unlock(&ucounts_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&ucounts_lock);
return ucounts;
}
static void put_ucounts(struct ucounts *ucounts)
{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
if (atomic_dec_and_test(&ucounts->count)) {
- spin_lock(&ucounts_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&ucounts_lock, flags);
hlist_del_init(&ucounts->node);
- spin_unlock(&ucounts_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ucounts_lock, flags);
kfree(ucounts);
}
--
2.7.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-20 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-20 13:07 Dmitry Vyukov
2017-01-20 13:26 ` Nikolay Borisov
2017-01-20 18:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-01-20 22:44 ` Nikolay Borisov [this message]
2017-01-21 0:28 ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-01-23 9:35 ` Dmitry Vyukov
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=fba89f51-5db7-a6e2-2715-eee120146b9e@gmail.com \
--to=n.borisov.lkml@gmail.com \
--cc=avagin@openvz.org \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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®