Re: [PATCH v4 02/13] rust: sync: introduce `Lock` and `Guard`
From: Gary Guo
Date: Tue Apr 11 2023 - 16:42:17 EST
On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 02:45:32 -0300
Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> They are generic Rust implementations of a lock and a lock guard that
> contain code that is common to all locks. Different backends will be
> introduced in subsequent commits.
>
> Reviewed-by: Martin Rodriguez Reboredo <yakoyoku@xxxxxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Gary Guo <gary@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v1 -> v2: No changes
> v2 -> v3: Use new Opaque::ffi_init from Benno's series
> v3 -> v4: Fixed name of parameter in Lock comment
>
> rust/kernel/sync.rs | 2 +-
> rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs | 162 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
>
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync.rs b/rust/kernel/sync.rs
> index 541d235ffbeb..81b0998eaa18 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/sync.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/sync.rs
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> use crate::types::Opaque;
>
> mod arc;
> +pub mod lock;
>
> pub use arc::{Arc, ArcBorrow, UniqueArc};
>
> @@ -25,7 +26,6 @@ impl LockClassKey {
> Self(Opaque::uninit())
> }
>
> - #[allow(dead_code)]
> pub(crate) fn as_ptr(&self) -> *mut bindings::lock_class_key {
> self.0.get()
> }
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..1a8ecccf4f24
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +//! Generic kernel lock and guard.
> +//!
> +//! It contains a generic Rust lock and guard that allow for different backends (e.g., mutexes,
> +//! spinlocks, raw spinlocks) to be provided with minimal effort.
> +
> +use super::LockClassKey;
> +use crate::{bindings, init::PinInit, pin_init, str::CStr, types::Opaque};
> +use core::{cell::UnsafeCell, marker::PhantomData, marker::PhantomPinned};
> +use macros::pin_data;
> +
> +/// The "backend" of a lock.
> +///
> +/// It is the actual implementation of the lock, without the need to repeat patterns used in all
> +/// locks.
> +///
> +/// # Safety
> +///
> +/// - Implementers must ensure that only one thread/CPU may access the protected data once the lock
> +/// is owned, that is, between calls to `lock` and `unlock`.
> +pub unsafe trait Backend {
> + /// The state required by the lock.
> + type State;
> +
> + /// The state required to be kept between lock and unlock.
> + type GuardState;
> +
> + /// Initialises the lock.
> + ///
> + /// # Safety
> + ///
> + /// `ptr` must be valid for write for the duration of the call, while `name` and `key` must
> + /// remain valid for read indefinitely.
> + unsafe fn init(
> + ptr: *mut Self::State,
> + name: *const core::ffi::c_char,
> + key: *mut bindings::lock_class_key,
> + );
Any reason that this takes FFI types rather than just `&'static CStr` and `&'static LockClassKey`?
> +
> + /// Acquires the lock, making the caller its owner.
> + ///
> + /// # Safety
> + ///
> + /// Callers must ensure that [`Backend::init`] has been previously called.
> + #[must_use]
> + unsafe fn lock(ptr: *mut Self::State) -> Self::GuardState;
> +
> + /// Releases the lock, giving up its ownership.
> + ///
> + /// # Safety
> + ///
> + /// It must only be called by the current owner of the lock.
> + unsafe fn unlock(ptr: *mut Self::State, guard_state: &Self::GuardState);
> +}
> +
> +/// A mutual exclusion primitive.
> +///
> +/// Exposes one of the kernel locking primitives. Which one is exposed depends on the lock banckend
> +/// specified as the generic parameter `B`.
> +#[pin_data]
> +pub struct Lock<T: ?Sized, B: Backend> {
> + /// The kernel lock object.
> + #[pin]
> + state: Opaque<B::State>,
> +
> + /// Some locks are known to be self-referential (e.g., mutexes), while others are architecture
> + /// or config defined (e.g., spinlocks). So we conservatively require them to be pinned in case
> + /// some architecture uses self-references now or in the future.
> + #[pin]
> + _pin: PhantomPinned,
> +
> + /// The data protected by the lock.
> + data: UnsafeCell<T>,
> +}
> +
> +// SAFETY: `Lock` can be transferred across thread boundaries iff the data it protects can.
> +unsafe impl<T: ?Sized + Send, B: Backend> Send for Lock<T, B> {}
> +
> +// SAFETY: `Lock` serialises the interior mutability it provides, so it is `Sync` as long as the
> +// data it protects is `Send`.
> +unsafe impl<T: ?Sized + Send, B: Backend> Sync for Lock<T, B> {}
> +
> +impl<T, B: Backend> Lock<T, B> {
> + /// Constructs a new lock initialiser.
> + #[allow(clippy::new_ret_no_self)]
> + pub fn new(t: T, name: &'static CStr, key: &'static LockClassKey) -> impl PinInit<Self> {
> + pin_init!(Self {
> + data: UnsafeCell::new(t),
> + _pin: PhantomPinned,
> + // SAFETY: `slot` is valid while the closure is called and both `name` and `key` have
> + // static lifetimes so they live indefinitely.
> + state <- Opaque::ffi_init(|slot| unsafe {
> + B::init(slot, name.as_char_ptr(), key.as_ptr())
> + }),
> + })
> + }
> +}
There is not drop implementation on `Lock`, which implies all locks can
be just forgotten?
I believe we discussed a case where this is can lead to UAF when a lock
is dropped while it is locked (e.g. because the guard is forgotten).
> +
> +impl<T: ?Sized, B: Backend> Lock<T, B> {
> + /// Acquires the lock and gives the caller access to the data protected by it.
> + pub fn lock(&self) -> Guard<'_, T, B> {
> + // SAFETY: The constructor of the type calls `init`, so the existence of the object proves
> + // that `init` was called.
> + let state = unsafe { B::lock(self.state.get()) };
> + // SAFETY: The lock was just acquired.
> + unsafe { Guard::new(self, state) }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/// A lock guard.
> +///
> +/// Allows mutual exclusion primitives that implement the `Backend` trait to automatically unlock
> +/// when a guard goes out of scope. It also provides a safe and convenient way to access the data
> +/// protected by the lock.
> +#[must_use = "the lock unlocks immediately when the guard is unused"]
> +pub struct Guard<'a, T: ?Sized, B: Backend> {
> + pub(crate) lock: &'a Lock<T, B>,
> + pub(crate) state: B::GuardState,
> + _not_send: PhantomData<*mut ()>,
> +}
> +
> +// SAFETY: `Guard` is sync when the data protected by the lock is also sync.
> +unsafe impl<T: Sync + ?Sized, B: Backend> Sync for Guard<'_, T, B> {}
> +
> +impl<T: ?Sized, B: Backend> core::ops::Deref for Guard<'_, T, B> {
> + type Target = T;
> +
> + fn deref(&self) -> &Self::Target {
> + // SAFETY: The caller owns the lock, so it is safe to deref the protected data.
> + unsafe { &*self.lock.data.get() }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +impl<T: ?Sized, B: Backend> core::ops::DerefMut for Guard<'_, T, B> {
> + fn deref_mut(&mut self) -> &mut Self::Target {
> + // SAFETY: The caller owns the lock, so it is safe to deref the protected data.
> + unsafe { &mut *self.lock.data.get() }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +impl<T: ?Sized, B: Backend> Drop for Guard<'_, T, B> {
> + fn drop(&mut self) {
> + // SAFETY: The caller owns the lock, so it is safe to unlock it.
> + unsafe { B::unlock(self.lock.state.get(), &self.state) };
> + }
> +}
> +
> +impl<'a, T: ?Sized, B: Backend> Guard<'a, T, B> {
> + /// Constructs a new immutable lock guard.
> + ///
> + /// # Safety
> + ///
> + /// The caller must ensure that it owns the lock.
> + pub(crate) unsafe fn new(lock: &'a Lock<T, B>, state: B::GuardState) -> Self {
> + Self {
> + lock,
> + state,
> + _not_send: PhantomData,
> + }
> + }
> +}