Re: [PATCH] aio: rcu_read_lock protection for new rcu_dereferencecalls

[Gu Zheng]

On 09/08/2013 10:10 PM, Artem Savkov wrote:

> Patch "aio: fix rcu sparse warnings introduced by ioctx table lookup patch"
> (77d30b14d24e557f89c41980011d72428514d729 in linux-next.git) introduced a
> couple of new rcu_dereference calls which are not protected by rcu_read_lock
> and result in following warnings during syscall fuzzing(trinity):
> 
> [  471.646379] ===============================
> [  471.649727] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
> [  471.653919] 3.11.0-next-20130906+ #496 Not tainted
> [  471.657792] -------------------------------
> [  471.661235] fs/aio.c:503 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> [  471.665968]
> [  471.665968] other info that might help us debug this:
> [  471.665968]
> [  471.672141]
> [  471.672141] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
> [  471.677549] 1 lock held by trinity-child0/3774:
> [  471.681675]  #0:  (&(&mm->ioctx_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<c119ba1a>] SyS_io_setup+0x63a/0xc70
> [  471.688721]
> [  471.688721] stack backtrace:
> [  471.692488] CPU: 1 PID: 3774 Comm: trinity-child0 Not tainted 3.11.0-next-20130906+ #496
> [  471.698437] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011
> [  471.703151]  00000000 00000000 c58bbf30 c18a814b de2234c0 c58bbf58 c10a4ec6 c1b0d824
> [  471.709544]  c1b0f60e 00000001 00000001 c1af61b0 00000000 cb670ac0 c3aca000 c58bbfac
> [  471.716251]  c119bc7c 00000002 00000001 00000000 c119b8dd 00000000 c10cf684 c58bbfb4
> [  471.722902] Call Trace:
> [  471.724859]  [<c18a814b>] dump_stack+0x4b/0x66
> [  471.728772]  [<c10a4ec6>] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xc6/0x100
> [  471.733716]  [<c119bc7c>] SyS_io_setup+0x89c/0xc70
> [  471.737806]  [<c119b8dd>] ? SyS_io_setup+0x4fd/0xc70
> [  471.741689]  [<c10cf684>] ? __audit_syscall_entry+0x94/0xe0
> [  471.746080]  [<c18b1fcc>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
> [  471.749723]  [<c1080000>] ? task_fork_fair+0x240/0x260
> 
> Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <artem.savkov@xxxxxxxxx>


Reviewed-by: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> ---
>  fs/aio.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/aio.c b/fs/aio.c
> index 9b8f9fa..2fb9160 100644
> --- a/fs/aio.c
> +++ b/fs/aio.c
> @@ -470,6 +470,7 @@ static int ioctx_add_table(struct kioctx *ctx, struct mm_struct *mm)
>  	struct aio_ring *ring;
>  
>  	spin_lock(&mm->ioctx_lock);
> +	rcu_read_lock();
>  	table = rcu_dereference(mm->ioctx_table);
>  
>  	while (1) {
> @@ -478,6 +479,7 @@ static int ioctx_add_table(struct kioctx *ctx, struct mm_struct *mm)
>  				if (!table->table[i]) {
>  					ctx->id = i;
>  					table->table[i] = ctx;
> +					rcu_read_unlock();
>  					spin_unlock(&mm->ioctx_lock);
>  
>  					ring = kmap_atomic(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> @@ -488,6 +490,7 @@ static int ioctx_add_table(struct kioctx *ctx, struct mm_struct *mm)
>  
>  		new_nr = (table ? table->nr : 1) * 4;
>  
> +		rcu_read_unlock();
>  		spin_unlock(&mm->ioctx_lock);
>  
>  		table = kzalloc(sizeof(*table) + sizeof(struct kioctx *) *
> @@ -498,6 +501,7 @@ static int ioctx_add_table(struct kioctx *ctx, struct mm_struct *mm)
>  		table->nr = new_nr;
>  
>  		spin_lock(&mm->ioctx_lock);
> +		rcu_read_lock();
>  		old = rcu_dereference(mm->ioctx_table);
>  
>  		if (!old) {
> @@ -622,10 +626,12 @@ static void kill_ioctx(struct mm_struct *mm, struct kioctx *ctx)
>  		struct kioctx_table *table;
>  
>  		spin_lock(&mm->ioctx_lock);
> +		rcu_read_lock();
>  		table = rcu_dereference(mm->ioctx_table);
>  
>  		WARN_ON(ctx != table->table[ctx->id]);
>  		table->table[ctx->id] = NULL;
> +		rcu_read_unlock();
>  		spin_unlock(&mm->ioctx_lock);
>  
>  		/* percpu_ref_kill() will do the necessary call_rcu() */


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/