diff options
author | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> | 2017-12-08 13:49:39 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> | 2018-01-14 18:49:16 +0100 |
commit | c1e2f0eaf015fb7076d51a339011f2383e6dd389 (patch) | |
tree | c993bc9680bf3297d147c1bae503e6e47362bad7 | |
parent | c92a9a461dff6140c539c61e457aa97df29517d6 (diff) | |
download | linux-stable-c1e2f0eaf015fb7076d51a339011f2383e6dd389.tar.gz linux-stable-c1e2f0eaf015fb7076d51a339011f2383e6dd389.tar.bz2 linux-stable-c1e2f0eaf015fb7076d51a339011f2383e6dd389.zip |
futex: Avoid violating the 10th rule of futex
Julia reported futex state corruption in the following scenario:
waiter waker stealer (prio > waiter)
futex(WAIT_REQUEUE_PI, uaddr, uaddr2,
timeout=[N ms])
futex_wait_requeue_pi()
futex_wait_queue_me()
freezable_schedule()
<scheduled out>
futex(LOCK_PI, uaddr2)
futex(CMP_REQUEUE_PI, uaddr,
uaddr2, 1, 0)
/* requeues waiter to uaddr2 */
futex(UNLOCK_PI, uaddr2)
wake_futex_pi()
cmp_futex_value_locked(uaddr2, waiter)
wake_up_q()
<woken by waker>
<hrtimer_wakeup() fires,
clears sleeper->task>
futex(LOCK_PI, uaddr2)
__rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock()
try_to_take_rt_mutex() /* steals lock */
rt_mutex_set_owner(lock, stealer)
<preempted>
<scheduled in>
rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock()
__rt_mutex_slowlock()
try_to_take_rt_mutex() /* fails, lock held by stealer */
if (timeout && !timeout->task)
return -ETIMEDOUT;
fixup_owner()
/* lock wasn't acquired, so,
fixup_pi_state_owner skipped */
return -ETIMEDOUT;
/* At this point, we've returned -ETIMEDOUT to userspace, but the
* futex word shows waiter to be the owner, and the pi_mutex has
* stealer as the owner */
futex_lock(LOCK_PI, uaddr2)
-> bails with EDEADLK, futex word says we're owner.
And suggested that what commit:
73d786bd043e ("futex: Rework inconsistent rt_mutex/futex_q state")
removes from fixup_owner() looks to be just what is needed. And indeed
it is -- I completely missed that requeue_pi could also result in this
case. So we need to restore that, except that subsequent patches, like
commit:
16ffa12d7425 ("futex: Pull rt_mutex_futex_unlock() out from under hb->lock")
changed all the locking rules. Even without that, the sequence:
- if (rt_mutex_futex_trylock(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex)) {
- locked = 1;
- goto out;
- }
- raw_spin_lock_irq(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
- owner = rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex);
- if (!owner)
- owner = rt_mutex_next_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex);
- raw_spin_unlock_irq(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
- ret = fixup_pi_state_owner(uaddr, q, owner);
already suggests there were races; otherwise we'd never have to look
at next_owner.
So instead of doing 3 consecutive wait_lock sections with who knows
what races, we do it all in a single section. Additionally, the usage
of pi_state->owner in fixup_owner() was only safe because only the
rt_mutex owner would modify it, which this additional case wrecks.
Luckily the values can only change away and not to the value we're
testing, this means we can do a speculative test and double check once
we have the wait_lock.
Fixes: 73d786bd043e ("futex: Rework inconsistent rt_mutex/futex_q state")
Reported-by: Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com>
Reported-by: Gratian Crisan <gratian.crisan@ni.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com>
Tested-by: Gratian Crisan <gratian.crisan@ni.com>
Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171208124939.7livp7no2ov65rrc@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/futex.c | 83 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 26 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h | 1 |
3 files changed, 87 insertions, 23 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c index 57d0b3657e16..9e69589b9248 100644 --- a/kernel/futex.c +++ b/kernel/futex.c @@ -2294,21 +2294,17 @@ static void unqueue_me_pi(struct futex_q *q) spin_unlock(q->lock_ptr); } -/* - * Fixup the pi_state owner with the new owner. - * - * Must be called with hash bucket lock held and mm->sem held for non - * private futexes. - */ static int fixup_pi_state_owner(u32 __user *uaddr, struct futex_q *q, - struct task_struct *newowner) + struct task_struct *argowner) { - u32 newtid = task_pid_vnr(newowner) | FUTEX_WAITERS; struct futex_pi_state *pi_state = q->pi_state; u32 uval, uninitialized_var(curval), newval; - struct task_struct *oldowner; + struct task_struct *oldowner, *newowner; + u32 newtid; int ret; + lockdep_assert_held(q->lock_ptr); + raw_spin_lock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock); oldowner = pi_state->owner; @@ -2317,11 +2313,17 @@ static int fixup_pi_state_owner(u32 __user *uaddr, struct futex_q *q, newtid |= FUTEX_OWNER_DIED; /* - * We are here either because we stole the rtmutex from the - * previous highest priority waiter or we are the highest priority - * waiter but have failed to get the rtmutex the first time. + * We are here because either: + * + * - we stole the lock and pi_state->owner needs updating to reflect + * that (@argowner == current), * - * We have to replace the newowner TID in the user space variable. + * or: + * + * - someone stole our lock and we need to fix things to point to the + * new owner (@argowner == NULL). + * + * Either way, we have to replace the TID in the user space variable. * This must be atomic as we have to preserve the owner died bit here. * * Note: We write the user space value _before_ changing the pi_state @@ -2334,6 +2336,42 @@ static int fixup_pi_state_owner(u32 __user *uaddr, struct futex_q *q, * in the PID check in lookup_pi_state. */ retry: + if (!argowner) { + if (oldowner != current) { + /* + * We raced against a concurrent self; things are + * already fixed up. Nothing to do. + */ + ret = 0; + goto out_unlock; + } + + if (__rt_mutex_futex_trylock(&pi_state->pi_mutex)) { + /* We got the lock after all, nothing to fix. */ + ret = 0; + goto out_unlock; + } + + /* + * Since we just failed the trylock; there must be an owner. + */ + newowner = rt_mutex_owner(&pi_state->pi_mutex); + BUG_ON(!newowner); + } else { + WARN_ON_ONCE(argowner != current); + if (oldowner == current) { + /* + * We raced against a concurrent self; things are + * already fixed up. Nothing to do. + */ + ret = 0; + goto out_unlock; + } + newowner = argowner; + } + + newtid = task_pid_vnr(newowner) | FUTEX_WAITERS; + if (get_futex_value_locked(&uval, uaddr)) goto handle_fault; @@ -2434,9 +2472,9 @@ static int fixup_owner(u32 __user *uaddr, struct futex_q *q, int locked) * Got the lock. We might not be the anticipated owner if we * did a lock-steal - fix up the PI-state in that case: * - * We can safely read pi_state->owner without holding wait_lock - * because we now own the rt_mutex, only the owner will attempt - * to change it. + * Speculative pi_state->owner read (we don't hold wait_lock); + * since we own the lock pi_state->owner == current is the + * stable state, anything else needs more attention. */ if (q->pi_state->owner != current) ret = fixup_pi_state_owner(uaddr, q, current); @@ -2444,6 +2482,19 @@ static int fixup_owner(u32 __user *uaddr, struct futex_q *q, int locked) } /* + * If we didn't get the lock; check if anybody stole it from us. In + * that case, we need to fix up the uval to point to them instead of + * us, otherwise bad things happen. [10] + * + * Another speculative read; pi_state->owner == current is unstable + * but needs our attention. + */ + if (q->pi_state->owner == current) { + ret = fixup_pi_state_owner(uaddr, q, NULL); + goto out; + } + + /* * Paranoia check. If we did not take the lock, then we should not be * the owner of the rt_mutex. */ diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c index 6f3dba6e4e9e..65cc0cb984e6 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c +++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c @@ -1290,6 +1290,19 @@ rt_mutex_slowlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state, return ret; } +static inline int __rt_mutex_slowtrylock(struct rt_mutex *lock) +{ + int ret = try_to_take_rt_mutex(lock, current, NULL); + + /* + * try_to_take_rt_mutex() sets the lock waiters bit + * unconditionally. Clean this up. + */ + fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(lock); + + return ret; +} + /* * Slow path try-lock function: */ @@ -1312,13 +1325,7 @@ static inline int rt_mutex_slowtrylock(struct rt_mutex *lock) */ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->wait_lock, flags); - ret = try_to_take_rt_mutex(lock, current, NULL); - - /* - * try_to_take_rt_mutex() sets the lock waiters bit - * unconditionally. Clean this up. - */ - fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(lock); + ret = __rt_mutex_slowtrylock(lock); raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags); @@ -1505,6 +1512,11 @@ int __sched rt_mutex_futex_trylock(struct rt_mutex *lock) return rt_mutex_slowtrylock(lock); } +int __sched __rt_mutex_futex_trylock(struct rt_mutex *lock) +{ + return __rt_mutex_slowtrylock(lock); +} + /** * rt_mutex_timed_lock - lock a rt_mutex interruptible * the timeout structure is provided diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h index 124e98ca0b17..68686b3ec3c1 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h +++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h @@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ extern bool rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock, struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter); extern int rt_mutex_futex_trylock(struct rt_mutex *l); +extern int __rt_mutex_futex_trylock(struct rt_mutex *l); extern void rt_mutex_futex_unlock(struct rt_mutex *lock); extern bool __rt_mutex_futex_unlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, |