summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/include/linux/mm.h
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJann Horn <jannh@google.com>2023-07-22 00:51:07 +0200
committerAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>2023-07-27 13:07:04 -0700
commitb1f02b95758d05b799731d939e76a0bd6da312db (patch)
treee463d7987ce0dfb824db51b338d575874e3ed214 /include/linux/mm.h
parent15571273db93ac2e4415e74280e04566c31d5eb0 (diff)
downloadlwn-b1f02b95758d05b799731d939e76a0bd6da312db.tar.gz
lwn-b1f02b95758d05b799731d939e76a0bd6da312db.zip
mm: fix memory ordering for mm_lock_seq and vm_lock_seq
mm->mm_lock_seq effectively functions as a read/write lock; therefore it must be used with acquire/release semantics. A specific example is the interaction between userfaultfd_register() and lock_vma_under_rcu(). userfaultfd_register() does the following from the point where it changes a VMA's flags to the point where concurrent readers are permitted again (in a simple scenario where only a single private VMA is accessed and no merging/splitting is involved): userfaultfd_register userfaultfd_set_vm_flags vm_flags_reset vma_start_write down_write(&vma->vm_lock->lock) vma->vm_lock_seq = mm_lock_seq [marks VMA as busy] up_write(&vma->vm_lock->lock) vm_flags_init [sets VM_UFFD_* in __vm_flags] vma->vm_userfaultfd_ctx.ctx = ctx mmap_write_unlock vma_end_write_all WRITE_ONCE(mm->mm_lock_seq, mm->mm_lock_seq + 1) [unlocks VMA] There are no memory barriers in between the __vm_flags update and the mm->mm_lock_seq update that unlocks the VMA, so the unlock can be reordered to above the `vm_flags_init()` call, which means from the perspective of a concurrent reader, a VMA can be marked as a userfaultfd VMA while it is not VMA-locked. That's bad, we definitely need a store-release for the unlock operation. The non-atomic write to vma->vm_lock_seq in vma_start_write() is mostly fine because all accesses to vma->vm_lock_seq that matter are always protected by the VMA lock. There is a racy read in vma_start_read() though that can tolerate false-positives, so we should be using WRITE_ONCE() to keep things tidy and data-race-free (including for KCSAN). On the other side, lock_vma_under_rcu() works as follows in the relevant region for locking and userfaultfd check: lock_vma_under_rcu vma_start_read vma->vm_lock_seq == READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq) [early bailout] down_read_trylock(&vma->vm_lock->lock) vma->vm_lock_seq == READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq) [main check] userfaultfd_armed checks vma->vm_flags & __VM_UFFD_FLAGS Here, the interesting aspect is how far down the mm->mm_lock_seq read can be reordered - if this read is reordered down below the vma->vm_flags access, this could cause lock_vma_under_rcu() to partly operate on information that was read while the VMA was supposed to be locked. To prevent this kind of downwards bleeding of the mm->mm_lock_seq read, we need to read it with a load-acquire. Some of the comment wording is based on suggestions by Suren. BACKPORT WARNING: One of the functions changed by this patch (which I've written against Linus' tree) is vma_try_start_write(), but this function no longer exists in mm/mm-everything. I don't know whether the merged version of this patch will be ordered before or after the patch that removes vma_try_start_write(). If you're backporting this patch to a tree with vma_try_start_write(), make sure this patch changes that function. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230721225107.942336-1-jannh@google.com Fixes: 5e31275cc997 ("mm: add per-VMA lock and helper functions to control it") Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'include/linux/mm.h')
-rw-r--r--include/linux/mm.h29
1 files changed, 23 insertions, 6 deletions
diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
index 2dd73e4f3d8e..406ab9ea818f 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm.h
@@ -641,8 +641,14 @@ static inline void vma_numab_state_free(struct vm_area_struct *vma) {}
*/
static inline bool vma_start_read(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
{
- /* Check before locking. A race might cause false locked result. */
- if (vma->vm_lock_seq == READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq))
+ /*
+ * Check before locking. A race might cause false locked result.
+ * We can use READ_ONCE() for the mm_lock_seq here, and don't need
+ * ACQUIRE semantics, because this is just a lockless check whose result
+ * we don't rely on for anything - the mm_lock_seq read against which we
+ * need ordering is below.
+ */
+ if (READ_ONCE(vma->vm_lock_seq) == READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq))
return false;
if (unlikely(down_read_trylock(&vma->vm_lock->lock) == 0))
@@ -653,8 +659,13 @@ static inline bool vma_start_read(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
* False unlocked result is impossible because we modify and check
* vma->vm_lock_seq under vma->vm_lock protection and mm->mm_lock_seq
* modification invalidates all existing locks.
+ *
+ * We must use ACQUIRE semantics for the mm_lock_seq so that if we are
+ * racing with vma_end_write_all(), we only start reading from the VMA
+ * after it has been unlocked.
+ * This pairs with RELEASE semantics in vma_end_write_all().
*/
- if (unlikely(vma->vm_lock_seq == READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq))) {
+ if (unlikely(vma->vm_lock_seq == smp_load_acquire(&vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq))) {
up_read(&vma->vm_lock->lock);
return false;
}
@@ -676,7 +687,7 @@ static bool __is_vma_write_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, int *mm_lock_seq)
* current task is holding mmap_write_lock, both vma->vm_lock_seq and
* mm->mm_lock_seq can't be concurrently modified.
*/
- *mm_lock_seq = READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq);
+ *mm_lock_seq = vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq;
return (vma->vm_lock_seq == *mm_lock_seq);
}
@@ -688,7 +699,13 @@ static inline void vma_start_write(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
return;
down_write(&vma->vm_lock->lock);
- vma->vm_lock_seq = mm_lock_seq;
+ /*
+ * We should use WRITE_ONCE() here because we can have concurrent reads
+ * from the early lockless pessimistic check in vma_start_read().
+ * We don't really care about the correctness of that early check, but
+ * we should use WRITE_ONCE() for cleanliness and to keep KCSAN happy.
+ */
+ WRITE_ONCE(vma->vm_lock_seq, mm_lock_seq);
up_write(&vma->vm_lock->lock);
}
@@ -702,7 +719,7 @@ static inline bool vma_try_start_write(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
if (!down_write_trylock(&vma->vm_lock->lock))
return false;
- vma->vm_lock_seq = mm_lock_seq;
+ WRITE_ONCE(vma->vm_lock_seq, mm_lock_seq);
up_write(&vma->vm_lock->lock);
return true;
}