The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <tj@kernel.org>, <axboe@kernel.dk>, <paolo.valente@linaro.org>,
	<fchecconi@gmail.com>, <avanzini.arianna@gmail.com>,
	<cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] block, bfq: update pos_root for idle bfq_queue in bfq_bfqq_move()
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:12:45 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6ca1e924-47fa-b94e-598c-69a9549eb68e@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211221115001.GD24748@quack2.suse.cz>

在 2021/12/21 19:50, Jan Kara 写道:
> On Tue 21-12-21 11:21:35, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> During code review, we found that if bfqq is not busy in
>> bfq_bfqq_move(), bfq_pos_tree_add_move() won't be called for the bfqq,
>> thus bfqq->pos_root still points to the old bfqg. However, the ref
>> that bfqq hold for the old bfqg will be released, so it's possible
>> that the old bfqg can be freed. This is problematic because the freed
>> bfqg can still be accessed by bfqq->pos_root.
>>
>> Fix the problem by calling bfq_pos_tree_add_move() for idle bfqq
>> as well.
>>
>> Fixes: e21b7a0b9887 ("block, bfq: add full hierarchical scheduling and cgroups support")
>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
> 
> I'm just wondering, how can it happen that !bfq_bfqq_busy() queue is in
> pos_tree? Because bfq_remove_request() takes care to remove bfqq from the
> pos_tree...

Hi,

It's right this is not a problem in common case. The problem seems to
relate to queue merging and task migration. Because I once reporduced
it with the same reporducer for the problem that offlined bfqg can be
inserted into service tree. The uaf is exactly in
bfq_remove_request->rb_rease(). However I didn't save the stack...

I guess this is because bfq_del_bfqq_busy() is called from
bfq_release_process_ref(), and queue merging prevert sunch bfqq to be
freed, thus such bfqq is not in service tree, and it's pos_root can
point to the old bfqg after bfq_bic_update_cgroup->bfq_bfqq_move.

I haven't confirmed this, however, this patch itself only cleared
bfqq->pos_root for idle bfqq, there should be no harm.

Thanks,
Kuai
> 
> 								Honza
> 
>> ---
>>   block/bfq-cgroup.c | 14 +++++++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/bfq-cgroup.c b/block/bfq-cgroup.c
>> index 8e8cf6b3d946..822dd28ecf53 100644
>> --- a/block/bfq-cgroup.c
>> +++ b/block/bfq-cgroup.c
>> @@ -677,7 +677,6 @@ void bfq_bfqq_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq,
>>   		bfq_deactivate_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq, false, false);
>>   	else if (entity->on_st_or_in_serv)
>>   		bfq_put_idle_entity(bfq_entity_service_tree(entity), entity);
>> -	bfqg_and_blkg_put(old_parent);
>>   
>>   	if (entity->parent &&
>>   	    entity->parent->last_bfqq_created == bfqq)
>> @@ -690,11 +689,16 @@ void bfq_bfqq_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq,
>>   	/* pin down bfqg and its associated blkg  */
>>   	bfqg_and_blkg_get(bfqg);
>>   
>> -	if (bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq)) {
>> -		if (unlikely(!bfqd->nonrot_with_queueing))
>> -			bfq_pos_tree_add_move(bfqd, bfqq);
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Don't leave the pos_root to old bfqg, since the ref to old bfqg will
>> +	 * be released and the bfqg might be freed.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (unlikely(!bfqd->nonrot_with_queueing))
>> +		bfq_pos_tree_add_move(bfqd, bfqq);
>> +	bfqg_and_blkg_put(old_parent);
>> +
>> +	if (bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq))
>>   		bfq_activate_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq);
>> -	}
>>   
>>   	if (!bfqd->in_service_queue && !bfqd->rq_in_driver)
>>   		bfq_schedule_dispatch(bfqd);
>> -- 
>> 2.31.1
>>

  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-22  3:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-21  3:21 [PATCH 0/4] block, bfq: minor cleanup and fix Yu Kuai
2021-12-21  3:21 ` [PATCH 1/4] block, bfq: cleanup bfq_bfqq_to_bfqg() Yu Kuai
2021-12-21 10:15   ` Jan Kara
2021-12-21  3:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] block, bfq: avoid moving bfqq to it's parent bfqg Yu Kuai
2021-12-21 10:16   ` Jan Kara
2021-12-21 11:08     ` yukuai (C)
2021-12-21 11:52       ` Jan Kara
2021-12-21  3:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] block, bfq: don't move oom_bfqq Yu Kuai
2021-12-21 10:18   ` Jan Kara
2021-12-21  3:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] block, bfq: update pos_root for idle bfq_queue in bfq_bfqq_move() Yu Kuai
2021-12-21 11:50   ` Jan Kara
2021-12-22  3:12     ` yukuai (C) [this message]
2021-12-22 14:17       ` Jan Kara
2021-12-23  1:03         ` yukuai (C)
2021-12-25  1:19         ` yukuai (C)
2021-12-25  7:44           ` yukuai (C)
2022-01-03 15:37             ` Jan Kara
2022-01-07  1:04               ` yukuai (C)

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=6ca1e924-47fa-b94e-598c-69a9549eb68e@huawei.com \
    --to=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    --cc=avanzini.arianna@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=fchecconi@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox