Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 15:05:01 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     wangbiao3@xiaomi.com
Cc:     mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, brauner@kernel.org, bsegall@google.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wenjieli@qti.qualcomm.com,
        chenguanyou@xiaomi.com, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched: fix user_mask double free
Message-ID: <Y3zXDZeTUgDz2hJ8@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <cover.1669020858.git.wangbiao3@xiaomi.com>
 <b8970a530d420109ee9fe0b268e097fb839211b0.1669020858.git.wangbiao3@xiaomi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b8970a530d420109ee9fe0b268e097fb839211b0.1669020858.git.wangbiao3@xiaomi.com>
Precedence: bulk


So you failed:

 - to Cc the original author of this code (Will Deacon)
 - to report what version this is against (apparently Linus' tree)
 - to check if this still applies to the latest tree (it doesn't)
 - to Cc the author of the code it now conflicts with (Waiman)
 - write something coherent in the changelog.
 - to include a Fixes tag.

Still, let me try and make sense of things...

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 06:04:20PM +0800, wangbiao3@xiaomi.com wrote:
> From: wangbiao3 <wangbiao3@xiaomi.com>
> 
> Clone/Fork a new task,call dup_task_struct->arch_dup_task_struct(tsk,orig)
> which copy the data of parent/sibling task inclding p->user_cpus_ptr,so
> the user_cpus_ptr of newtask is the same with orig task's.When
> dup_task_struct call dup_user_cpus_ptr(tsk, orig, node),it return 0
> dircetly if src->user_cpus_ptris free by other task,in this case ,
> the newtask's address of user_cpus_ptr is not changed.

(even just inserting some whitespace would've made it so much easier to
read)

But, the only way that would be possible is if
force_compatible_cpus_allowed_ptr() were to be called on !current, and
that just doesn't happen, the only callsite is:

arch/arm64/kernel/process.c:                    force_compatible_cpus_allowed_ptr(current);

And you can't be in fork() and exec() at the same time.

If it were possible to call restrict_cpus_allowed_ptr() on a non-current
task then yes, absolutely, which is why:

  8f9ea86fdf99 ("sched: Always preserve the user requested cpumask")

also wraps the thing in pi_lock, but looking at it now, perhaps it needs
to do the alloc/copy first and swap under pi_lock instead.

(leaving the rest for the newly Cc'ed)

> Finally,
> wakup newtask to execute, call task_cpu_possible_mask-->
> do_set_cpus_allowed to set new task's user_cpus_ptr(user_mask) which
> call kfree user_mask at the end. So cause a slub double free panic.
> 
> Use pi_lock to protect content of user_cpus_ptr in dup_user_cpus_ptr and
> clear dst->user_cpus_ptr when found src->user_cpus_ptr is null
> 
> kernel BUG at mm/slub.c:363!
> Call trace:
>  __slab_free+0x230/0x28c
>  kfree+0x220/0x2cc
>  do_set_cpus_allowed+0x74/0xa4
>  select_fallback_rq+0x12c/0x200
>  wake_up_new_task+0x26c/0x304
>  kernel_clone+0x2c0/0x470
>  __arm64_sys_clone+0x5c/0x8c
>  invoke_syscall+0x60/0x150
>  el0_svc_common.llvm.13030543509303927816+0x98/0x114
>  do_el0_svc_compat+0x20/0x30
>  el0_svc_compat+0x28/0x90
>  el0t_32_sync_handler+0x7c/0xbc
>  el0t_32_sync+0x1b8/0x1bc
> 
> Signed-off-by: wangbiao3 <wangbiao3@xiaomi.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index daff72f00385..b013d8b777b4 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2584,29 +2584,38 @@ void do_set_cpus_allowed(struct task_struct *p, const struct cpumask *new_mask)
>         __do_set_cpus_allowed(p, new_mask, 0);
>  }
> 
> +static inline struct cpumask *clear_user_cpus_ptr(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> +       struct cpumask *user_mask = NULL;
> +
> +       swap(p->user_cpus_ptr, user_mask);
> +
> +       return user_mask;
> +}
> +
>  int dup_user_cpus_ptr(struct task_struct *dst, struct task_struct *src,
>                       int node)
>  {
> -       if (!src->user_cpus_ptr)
> -               return 0;
> +       unsigned long flags;
> +       struct cpumask *user_mask = NULL;
> 
>         dst->user_cpus_ptr = kmalloc_node(cpumask_size(), GFP_KERNEL, node);
>         if (!dst->user_cpus_ptr)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
> 
> +       /* Use pi_lock to protect content of user_cpus_ptr */
> +       raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&src->pi_lock, flags);
> +       if (!src->user_cpus_ptr) {
> +               user_mask = clear_user_cpus_ptr(dst);
> +               raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&src->pi_lock, flags);
> +               kfree(user_mask);
> +               return 0;
> +       }
>         cpumask_copy(dst->user_cpus_ptr, src->user_cpus_ptr);
> +       raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&src->pi_lock, flags);
>         return 0;
>  }
> 
> -static inline struct cpumask *clear_user_cpus_ptr(struct task_struct *p)
> -{
> -       struct cpumask *user_mask = NULL;
> -
> -       swap(p->user_cpus_ptr, user_mask);
> -
> -       return user_mask;
> -}
> -
>  void release_user_cpus_ptr(struct task_struct *p)
>  {
>         kfree(clear_user_cpus_ptr(p));
> --
> 2.38.1
> 
> #/******?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from XIAOMI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!******/#