Skip to content

K
kernel_linux

OpenHarmony / kernel_linux
上一次同步 4 年多

通知 15
Star 8
Fork 2
K
kernel_linux
切换分支/标签
  1. 11 4月, 2018 1 次提交
    • Y
      bpf/tracing: fix a deadlock in perf_event_detach_bpf_prog · 3a38bb98
      由 Yonghong Song 提交于 
      syzbot reported a possible deadlock in perf_event_detach_bpf_prog.
The error details:
  ======================================================
  WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
  4.16.0-rc7+ #3 Not tainted
  ------------------------------------------------------
  syz-executor7/24531 is trying to acquire lock:
   (bpf_event_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<000000008a849b07>] perf_event_detach_bpf_prog+0x92/0x3d0 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:854

  but task is already holding lock:
   (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: [<0000000038768f87>] vm_mmap_pgoff+0x198/0x280 mm/util.c:353

  which lock already depends on the new lock.

  the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

  -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
       __might_fault+0x13a/0x1d0 mm/memory.c:4571
       _copy_to_user+0x2c/0xc0 lib/usercopy.c:25
       copy_to_user include/linux/uaccess.h:155 [inline]
       bpf_prog_array_copy_info+0xf2/0x1c0 kernel/bpf/core.c:1694
       perf_event_query_prog_array+0x1c7/0x2c0 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:891
       _perf_ioctl kernel/events/core.c:4750 [inline]
       perf_ioctl+0x3e1/0x1480 kernel/events/core.c:4770
       vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:46 [inline]
       do_vfs_ioctl+0x1b1/0x1520 fs/ioctl.c:686
       SYSC_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:701 [inline]
       SyS_ioctl+0x8f/0xc0 fs/ioctl.c:692
       do_syscall_64+0x281/0x940 arch/x86/entry/common.c:287
       entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x42/0xb7

  -> #0 (bpf_event_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0x1d5/0x580 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3920
       __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:756 [inline]
       __mutex_lock+0x16f/0x1a80 kernel/locking/mutex.c:893
       mutex_lock_nested+0x16/0x20 kernel/locking/mutex.c:908
       perf_event_detach_bpf_prog+0x92/0x3d0 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:854
       perf_event_free_bpf_prog kernel/events/core.c:8147 [inline]
       _free_event+0xbdb/0x10f0 kernel/events/core.c:4116
       put_event+0x24/0x30 kernel/events/core.c:4204
       perf_mmap_close+0x60d/0x1010 kernel/events/core.c:5172
       remove_vma+0xb4/0x1b0 mm/mmap.c:172
       remove_vma_list mm/mmap.c:2490 [inline]
       do_munmap+0x82a/0xdf0 mm/mmap.c:2731
       mmap_region+0x59e/0x15a0 mm/mmap.c:1646
       do_mmap+0x6c0/0xe00 mm/mmap.c:1483
       do_mmap_pgoff include/linux/mm.h:2223 [inline]
       vm_mmap_pgoff+0x1de/0x280 mm/util.c:355
       SYSC_mmap_pgoff mm/mmap.c:1533 [inline]
       SyS_mmap_pgoff+0x462/0x5f0 mm/mmap.c:1491
       SYSC_mmap arch/x86/kernel/sys_x86_64.c:100 [inline]
       SyS_mmap+0x16/0x20 arch/x86/kernel/sys_x86_64.c:91
       do_syscall_64+0x281/0x940 arch/x86/entry/common.c:287
       entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x42/0xb7

  other info that might help us debug this:

   Possible unsafe locking scenario:

         CPU0                    CPU1
         ----                    ----
    lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
                                 lock(bpf_event_mutex);
                                 lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
    lock(bpf_event_mutex);

   *** DEADLOCK ***
  ======================================================

The bug is introduced by Commit f371b304 ("bpf/tracing: allow
user space to query prog array on the same tp") where copy_to_user,
which requires mm->mmap_sem, is called inside bpf_event_mutex lock.
At the same time, during perf_event file descriptor close,
mm->mmap_sem is held first and then subsequent
perf_event_detach_bpf_prog needs bpf_event_mutex lock.
Such a senario caused a deadlock.

As suggested by Daniel, moving copy_to_user out of the
bpf_event_mutex lock should fix the problem.

Fixes: f371b304 ("bpf/tracing: allow user space to query prog array on the same tp")
Reported-by: syzbot+dc5ca0e4c9bfafaf2bae@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: NYonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
      3a38bb98
  3. 10 4月, 2018 1 次提交
    • L
      Fix subtle macro variable shadowing in min_not_zero() · e9092d0d
      由 Linus Torvalds 提交于 
      Commit 3c8ba0d6 ("kernel.h: Retain constant expression output for
max()/min()") rewrote our min/max macros to be very clever, but in the
meantime resurrected a variable name shadow issue that we had had
previously fixed in commit 589a9785 ("min/max: remove sparse
warnings when they're nested").

That commit talks about the sparse warnings that this shadowing causes,
which we ignored as just a minor annoyance.  But it turns out that the
sparse warning is the least of our problems.  We actually have a real
bug due to the shadowing through the interaction with "min_not_zero()",
which ends up doing

   min(__x, __y)

internally, and then the new declaration of "__x" and "__y" as new
variables in __cmp_once() results in a complete mess of an expression,
and "min_not_zero()" doesn't work at all.

For some odd reason, this only ever caused (reported) problems on s390,
even though it is a generic issue and most of the (obviously successful)
testing of the problematic commit had happened on other architectures.

Quoting Sebastian Ott:
 "What happened is that the bio build by the partition detection code
  was attempted to be split by the block layer because the block queue
  had a max_sector setting of 0. blk_queue_max_hw_sectors uses
  min_not_zero."

So re-introduce the use of __UNIQUE_ID() to make sure that the min/max
macros do not have these kinds of clashes.

[ That said, __UNIQUE_ID() itself has several issues that make it less
  than wonderful.

  In particular, the "uniqueness" has a fallback on the line number,
  which means that it's not actually unique in more complex cases if you
  don't build with gcc or clang (which have working unique counters that
  aren't tied to line numbers).

  That historical broken fallback also means that we have that pointless
  "prefix" argument that doesn't actually make much sense _except_ for
  the known-broken case. Oh well. ]

Fixes: 3c8ba0d6 ("kernel.h: Retain constant expression output for max()/min()")
Reported-and-tested-by: NSebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      e9092d0d
  5. 06 4月, 2018 38 次提交