From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, bvanassche@acm.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] blk_mq: clear rq mapping in driver tags before freeing rqs in sched tags
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 10:45:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRx0QE8T4RJONlA8@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11ef6a06-4b6f-44d0-af79-f96e16456b55@huawei.com>
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:02:09AM +0800, yukuai (C) wrote:
> On 2021/08/18 8:52, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:23:06AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> > > If ioscheduler is not none, hctx->tags->rq[tag] will point to
> > > hctx->sched_tags->static_rq[internel_tag] in blk_mq_get_driver_tag().
> > > However, static_rq of sched_tags might be freed through switching
> > > elevator or increasing nr_requests. Thus leave a window for some drivers
> > > to get the freed request through blk_mq_tag_to_rq(tags, tag).
> >
> > I believe I have explained that it is bug of driver which has knowledge
> > if the passed tag is valid or not. We are clear that driver need to cover
> > race between normal completion and timeout/error handling.
> >
> > >
> > > It's difficult to fix this uaf from driver side, I'm thinking about
> >
> > So far not see any analysis on why the uaf is triggered, care to
> > investigate the reason?
>
> Hi, Ming
>
> I'm sorry if I didn't explian the uaf clearly.
>
> 1) At first, a normal io is submitted and completed with scheduler:
>
> internel_tag = blk_mq_get_tag -> get tag from sched_tags
> blk_mq_rq_ctx_init
> sched_tags->rq[internel_tag] = sched_tag->static_rq[internel_tag]
> ...
> blk_mq_get_driver_tag
> __blk_mq_get_driver_tag -> get tag from tags
> tags->rq[tag] = sched_tag->static_rq[internel_tag]
>
> So, both tags->rq[tag] and sched_tags->rq[internel_tag] are pointing
> to the request: sched_tags->static_rq[internal_tag].
>
> 2) Then, if the sched_tags->static_rq is freed:
>
> blk_mq_sched_free_requests
> blk_mq_free_rqs(q->tag_set, hctx->sched_tags, i)
> blk_mq_clear_rq_mapping(set, tags, hctx_idx);
> -> sched_tags->rq[internel_tag] is set to null here
Please take a look at blk_mq_clear_rq_mapping():
//drv_tags points to set->tags[] which is shared in host wide
struct blk_mq_tags *drv_tags = set->tags[hctx_idx];
...
//tags points to sched_tags
list_for_each_entry(page, &tags->page_list, lru) {
unsigned long start = (unsigned long)page_address(page);
unsigned long end = start + order_to_size(page->private);
int i;
/* clear drv_tags->rq[i] in case it is from this sched tags*/
for (i = 0; i < set->queue_depth; i++) {
struct request *rq = drv_tags->rqs[i];
unsigned long rq_addr = (unsigned long)rq;
if (rq_addr >= start && rq_addr < end) {
WARN_ON_ONCE(refcount_read(&rq->ref) != 0);
cmpxchg(&drv_tags->rqs[i], rq, NULL);
}
}
}
So we do clear tags->rq[] instead of sched_tag->rq[].
>
> After switching elevator, tags->rq[tag] still point to the request
> that is just freed.
No.
>
> 3) nbd server send a reply with random tag directly:
>
> recv_work
> nbd_read_stat
> blk_mq_tag_to_rq(tags, tag)
> rq = tags->rq[tag] -> rq is freed
>
> Usually, nbd will get tag and send a request to server first, and then
> handle the reply. However, if the request is skipped, such uaf problem
> can be triggered.
When or how is such reply with random tag replied to nbd client? Is it
possible for nbd client to detect such un-expected/bad situation?
What if blk_mq_tag_to_rq() is just called before/when we clear tags->rq[]?
>
> >
> > The request reference has been cleared too in blk_mq_tag_update_depth():
> >
> > blk_mq_tag_update_depth
> > blk_mq_free_rqs
> > blk_mq_clear_rq_mapping
> >
>
> What I'm trying to do is to clear rq mapping in both
> hctx->sched_tags->rq and hctx->tags->rq when sched_tags->static_rq
> is freed. However, I forgot about the case when tags is shared in
> multiple device. Thus what this patch does is clearly wrong...
>
> So, what do you think about adding a new interface to iterate the
> request in tags->rq[], find what is pointing to the
> sched_tags->static_rq[], and use cmpxchg() to clear them?
See above, we already clear tags->rq[] if the rq is from to-be-freed
sched_tags.
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-18 2:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-17 2:23 [PATCH RFC] blk_mq: clear rq mapping in driver tags before freeing rqs in sched tags Yu Kuai
2021-08-18 0:52 ` Ming Lei
2021-08-18 2:02 ` yukuai (C)
2021-08-18 2:45 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2021-08-18 3:13 ` 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=YRx0QE8T4RJONlA8@T590 \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai3@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