Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:02:10 +0900
From:   Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>, paulmck@kernel.org,
        "Naveen N . Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com>,
        Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] kprobes: Lock rcu_read_lock() while searching
 kprobe
Message-Id: <20191203150210.7210c6e29c537c8954889c5b@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20191202233531.GO17234@google.com>
References: <157527193358.11113.14859628506665612104.stgit@devnote2>
        <20191202210854.GD17234@google.com>
        <20191203073453.057c1bed6931457b011dd8cc@kernel.org>
        <20191202233531.GO17234@google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 18:35:31 -0500
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 07:34:53AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Hi Joel,
> > 
> > On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:08:54 -0500
> > Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 04:32:13PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > Anders reported that the lockdep warns that suspicious
> > > > RCU list usage in register_kprobe() (detected by
> > > > CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST.) This is because get_kprobe()
> > > > access kprobe_table[] by hlist_for_each_entry_rcu()
> > > > without rcu_read_lock.
> > > > 
> > > > If we call get_kprobe() from the breakpoint handler context,
> > > > it is run with preempt disabled, so this is not a problem.
> > > > But in other cases, instead of rcu_read_lock(), we locks
> > > > kprobe_mutex so that the kprobe_table[] is not updated.
> > > > So, current code is safe, but still not good from the view
> > > > point of RCU.
> > > > 
> > > > Let's lock the rcu_read_lock() around get_kprobe() and
> > > > ensure kprobe_mutex is locked at those points.
> > > > 
> > > > Note that we can safely unlock rcu_read_lock() soon after
> > > > accessing the list, because we are sure the found kprobe has
> > > > never gone before unlocking kprobe_mutex. Unless locking
> > > > kprobe_mutex, caller must hold rcu_read_lock() until it
> > > > finished operations on that kprobe.
> > > > 
> > > > Reported-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
> > > 
> > > Instead of this, can you not just pass the lockdep_is_held() expression as
> > > the last argument to list_for_each_entry_rcu() to silence the warning? Then
> > > it will be a simpler patch.
> > 
> > Ah, I see. That is more natural to silence the warning.
> 
> Np, and on such fix, my:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> 

Thanks! I found another similar issue while testing, I'll fix it too.

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>