Re: [PATCH] sched: fix potential use-after-free with cfs bandwidth

From: K Prateek Nayak
Date: Thu Feb 13 2025 - 23:08:06 EST


Hello Josh,

On 2/11/2025 1:21 AM, Josh Don wrote:
We remove the cfs_rq throttled_csd_list entry *before* doing the
unthrottle. The problem with that is that destroy_bandwidth() does a
lockless scan of the system for any non-empty CSD lists. As a result,
it is possible that destroy_bandwidth() returns while we still have a
cfs_rq from the task group about to be unthrottled.

For full correctness, we should avoid removal from the list until after
we're done unthrottling in __cfsb_csd_unthrottle().

For consistency, we make the same change to distribute_cfs_runtime(),
even though this should already be safe due to destroy_bandwidth()
cancelling the bandwidth hrtimers.

Signed-off-by: Josh Don <joshdon@xxxxxxxxxx>

Other than a small nit: s/destroy_bandwidth/destroy_cfs_bandwidth/g
please feel free to add:

Reviewed-and-tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@xxxxxxx>

--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek

---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 34fe6e9490c2..78f542ab03cf 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5917,10 +5917,10 @@ static void __cfsb_csd_unthrottle(void *arg)
list_for_each_entry_safe(cursor, tmp, &rq->cfsb_csd_list,
throttled_csd_list) {
- list_del_init(&cursor->throttled_csd_list);
-
if (cfs_rq_throttled(cursor))
unthrottle_cfs_rq(cursor);
+
+ list_del_init(&cursor->throttled_csd_list);
}
rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -6034,11 +6034,11 @@ static bool distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b)
rq_lock_irqsave(rq, &rf);
- list_del_init(&cfs_rq->throttled_csd_list);
-
if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
unthrottle_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
+ list_del_init(&cfs_rq->throttled_csd_list);
+
rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);
}
SCHED_WARN_ON(!list_empty(&local_unthrottle));