Re: [PATCH] tty: fix data races on tty_buffer.commit

[Peter Hurley]

On 09/04/2015 03:37 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 9:34 PM, Peter Hurley <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>
>> On 09/04/2015 03:09 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>> Race on buffer data happens in the following scenario:
>>> __tty_buffer_request_room does a plain write of tail->commit,
>>> no barriers were executed before that.
>>> At this point flush_to_ldisc reads this new value of commit,
>>> and reads buffer data, no barriers in between.
>>> The committed buffer data is not necessary visible to flush_to_ldisc.
>>
>> Please submit one patch for each "fix", because it is not possible
>> to review what you believe you're fixing.
>>
>> See below for an example.
>>
>>> Similar bug happens when tty_schedule_flip commits data.
>>>
>>> Another race happens in tty_buffer_flush. It uses plain reads
>>> to read tty_buffer.next, as the result it can free a buffer
>>> which has pending writes in __tty_buffer_request_room thread.
>>> For example, tty_buffer_flush calls tty_buffer_free which
>>> reads b->size, the size may not be visible to this thread.
>>> As the result a large buffer can hang in the freelist.
>>>
>>> Update commit with smp_store_release and read commit with
>>> smp_load_acquire, as it is commit that signals data readiness.
>>> This is orthogonal to the existing synchronization on tty_buffer.next,
>>> which is required to not dismiss a buffer with unconsumed data.
>>>
>>> The data race was found with KernelThreadSanitizer (KTSAN).
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>>>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c b/drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c
>>> index 4cf263d..4fae5d1 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c
>>> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ void tty_buffer_unlock_exclusive(struct tty_port *port)
>>>       struct tty_bufhead *buf = &port->buf;
>>>       int restart;
>>>
>>> -     restart = buf->head->commit != buf->head->read;
>>> +     restart = READ_ONCE(buf->head->commit) != buf->head->read;
>>>
>>>       atomic_dec(&buf->priority);
>>>       mutex_unlock(&buf->lock);
>>> @@ -242,11 +242,14 @@ void tty_buffer_flush(struct tty_struct *tty, struct tty_ldisc *ld)
>>>       atomic_inc(&buf->priority);
>>>
>>>       mutex_lock(&buf->lock);
>>> -     while ((next = buf->head->next) != NULL) {
>>> +     /* paired with smp_store_release in __tty_buffer_request_room();
>>> +      * ensures there are no outstanding writes to buf->head when we free it
>>> +      */
>>> +     while ((next = smp_load_acquire(&buf->head->next)) != NULL) {
>>>               tty_buffer_free(port, buf->head);
>>>               buf->head = next;
>>>       }
>>> -     buf->head->read = buf->head->commit;
>>> +     buf->head->read = READ_ONCE(buf->head->commit);
>>>
>>>       if (ld && ld->ops->flush_buffer)
>>>               ld->ops->flush_buffer(tty);
>>> @@ -290,13 +293,15 @@ static int __tty_buffer_request_room(struct tty_port *port, size_t size,
>>>               if (n != NULL) {
>>>                       n->flags = flags;
>>>                       buf->tail = n;
>>> -                     b->commit = b->used;
>>> -                     /* paired w/ barrier in flush_to_ldisc(); ensures the
>>> -                      * latest commit value can be read before the head is
>>> -                      * advanced to the next buffer
>>> +                     /* paired with smp_load_acquire in flush_to_ldisc();
>>> +                      * ensures flush_to_ldisc() sees buffer data.
>>>                        */
>>> -                     smp_wmb();
>>> -                     b->next = n;
>>> +                     smp_store_release(&b->commit, b->used);
>>> +                     /* paired with smp_load_acquire in flush_to_ldisc();
>>> +                      * ensures the latest commit value can be read before
>>> +                      * the head is advanced to the next buffer
>>> +                      */
>>> +                     smp_store_release(&b->next, n);
>>>               } else if (change)
>>>                       size = 0;
>>>               else
>>> @@ -394,7 +399,10 @@ void tty_schedule_flip(struct tty_port *port)
>>>  {
>>>       struct tty_bufhead *buf = &port->buf;
>>>
>>> -     buf->tail->commit = buf->tail->used;
>>> +     /* paired with smp_load_acquire in flush_to_ldisc(); ensures the
>>> +      * committed data is visible to flush_to_ldisc()
>>> +      */
>>> +     smp_store_release(&buf->tail->commit, buf->tail->used);
>>>       schedule_work(&buf->work);
>>
>> schedule_work() is an implied barrier for obvious reasons.
> 
> OK, I will split.
> To answer this particular question: you need release/write barrier
> _before_ the synchronizing store, not _after_. Once the store to
> commit happened, another thread can start reading buffer data, this
> thread has not yet executed schedule_work at this point.

No.

If the work is already running, a new work will be scheduled, and the
new work will pick up the changed commit index.

If the work is already running /and it happens to see the new commit index/,
it will process the buffer. The new work will start and discover there is
nothing to do.

Regards,
Peter Hurley

PS - You need to base your patches on current mainline. You'll see that I already
converted the smp_rmb()/smp_wmb() of 'next' to load_acquire/store_release. FWIW,
that's not a fix, but a minor optimization. Commit sha 069f38b4983efaea9



>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_schedule_flip);
>>> @@ -488,13 +496,15 @@ static void flush_to_ldisc(struct work_struct *work)
>>>               if (atomic_read(&buf->priority))
>>>                       break;
>>>
>>> -             next = head->next;
>>> -             /* paired w/ barrier in __tty_buffer_request_room();
>>> +             /* paired with smp_store_release in __tty_buffer_request_room();
>>>                * ensures commit value read is not stale if the head
>>>                * is advancing to the next buffer
>>>                */
>>> -             smp_rmb();
>>> -             count = head->commit - head->read;
>>> +             next = smp_load_acquire(&head->next);
>>> +             /* paired with smp_store_release in __tty_buffer_request_room();
>>> +              * ensures we see the committed buffer data
>>> +              */
>>> +             count = smp_load_acquire(&head->commit) - head->read;
>>>               if (!count) {
>>>                       if (next == NULL) {
>>>                               check_other_closed(tty);
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> 

--
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/