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, 18 Feb 2020 13:30:02 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
To:     Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, elver@google.com,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        peterz@infradead.org,
        syzbot+c034966b0b02f94f7f34@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
        syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] fork: annotate a data race in vm_area_dup()
Message-ID: <20200218103002.6rtjreyqjepo3yxe@box>
References: <20200217223138.doaph66iwprbwhw5@box>
 <EAD6E54D-8A57-4494-94F2-2EEEC3265560@lca.pw>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <EAD6E54D-8A57-4494-94F2-2EEEC3265560@lca.pw>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 10:59:47PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Feb 17, 2020, at 5:31 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> > 
> > I'm confused. AFAICS both sides hold mmap_sem on write:
> > 
> > - vm_mmap_pgoff() takes mmap_sem for the write on the write side
> > 
> > - do_mprotect_pkey() takes mmap_sem for the write on the read side
> > 
> > 
> > What do I miss?
> 
> Ah, good catch. I missed the locking for the read there. This is interesting because Marco
> did confirmed that the concurrency could happen,
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191025173511.181416-1-elver@google.com/
> 
> If that means KCSAN is not at fault, then I could think of two things,
> 
> 1) someone downgrades the lock.
> 
> I don’t think that a case here. Only __do_munmap() will do that but I did not see how
> it will affect us here.
> 
> 2) the reader and writer are two different processes.
> 
> So, they held a different mmap_sem, but I can’t see how could two processes shared
> the same vm_area_struct. Also, file->f_mapping->i_mmap was also stored in the
> writer, but I can’t see how it was also loaded in the reader.
> 
> Any ideas?

I think I've got this:

vm_area_dup() blindly copies all fields of orignal VMA to the new one.
This includes coping vm_area_struct::shared.rb which is normally protected
by i_mmap_lock. But this is fine because the read value will be
overwritten on the following __vma_link_file() under proper protectection.

So the fix is correct, but justificaiton is lacking.

Also, I would like to more fine-grained annotation: marking with
data_race() 200 bytes copy may hide other issues.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov