From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>
Cc: "Cong Wang" <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
"Linux Kernel Network Developers" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"Cameron Berkenpas" <cam@neo-zeon.de>,
"Peter Geis" <pgwipeout@gmail.com>,
"Lu Fengqi" <lufq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Daniël Sonck" <dsonck92@gmail.com>,
"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch net] cgroup: fix cgroup_sk_alloc() for sk_clone_lock()
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 18:14:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200620011409.GG237539@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f80878fe-bf2d-605a-50e4-bda97a1390c2@huawei.com>
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 09:00:40AM +0800, Zefan Li wrote:
> On 2020/6/20 8:51, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:40:19PM +0800, Zefan Li wrote:
> >> On 2020/6/19 5:09, Cong Wang wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:36 PM Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:19:13PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 6:44 PM Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks for fixing this.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2020/6/17 2:03, Cong Wang wrote:
> >>>>>>> When we clone a socket in sk_clone_lock(), its sk_cgrp_data is
> >>>>>>> copied, so the cgroup refcnt must be taken too. And, unlike the
> >>>>>>> sk_alloc() path, sock_update_netprioidx() is not called here.
> >>>>>>> Therefore, it is safe and necessary to grab the cgroup refcnt
> >>>>>>> even when cgroup_sk_alloc is disabled.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> sk_clone_lock() is in BH context anyway, the in_interrupt()
> >>>>>>> would terminate this function if called there. And for sk_alloc()
> >>>>>>> skcd->val is always zero. So it's safe to factor out the code
> >>>>>>> to make it more readable.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Fixes: 090e28b229af92dc5b ("netprio_cgroup: Fix unlimited memory leak of v2 cgroups")
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> but I don't think the bug was introduced by this commit, because there
> >>>>>> are already calls to cgroup_sk_alloc_disable() in write_priomap() and
> >>>>>> write_classid(), which can be triggered by writing to ifpriomap or
> >>>>>> classid in cgroupfs. This commit just made it much easier to happen
> >>>>>> with systemd invovled.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think it's 4bfc0bb2c60e2f4c ("bpf: decouple the lifetime of cgroup_bpf from cgroup itself"),
> >>>>>> which added cgroup_bpf_get() in cgroup_sk_alloc().
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Good point.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I take a deeper look, it looks like commit d979a39d7242e06
> >>>>> is the one to blame, because it is the first commit that began to
> >>>>> hold cgroup refcnt in cgroup_sk_alloc().
> >>>>
> >>>> I agree, ut seems that the issue is not related to bpf and probably
> >>>> can be reproduced without CONFIG_CGROUP_BPF. d979a39d7242e06 indeed
> >>>> seems closer to the origin.
> >>>
> >>> Yeah, I will update the Fixes tag and send V2.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Commit d979a39d7242e06 looks innocent to me. With this commit when cgroup_sk_alloc
> >> is disabled and then a socket is cloned the cgroup refcnt will not be incremented,
> >> but this is fine, because when the socket is to be freed:
> >>
> >> sk_prot_free()
> >> cgroup_sk_free()
> >> cgroup_put(sock_cgroup_ptr(skcd)) == cgroup_put(&cgrp_dfl_root.cgrp)
> >>
> >> cgroup_put() does nothing for the default root cgroup, so nothing bad will happen.
> >>
> >> but cgroup_bpf_put() will decrement the bpf refcnt while this refcnt were not incremented
> >> as cgroup_sk_alloc has already been disabled. That's why I think it's 4bfc0bb2c60e2f4c
> >> that needs to be fixed.
> >
> > Hm, does it mean that the problem always happens with the root cgroup?
> >
> >>From the stacktrace provided by Peter it looks like that the problem
> > is bpf-related, but the original patch says nothing about it.
> >
> > So from the test above it sounds like the problem is that we're trying
> > to release root's cgroup_bpf, which is a bad idea, I totally agree.
> > Is this the problem?
>
> I think so, though I'm not familiar with the bfp cgroup code.
>
> > If so, we might wanna fix it in a different way,
> > just checking if (!(css->flags & CSS_NO_REF)) in cgroup_bpf_put()
> > like in cgroup_put(). It feels more reliable to me.
> >
>
> Yeah I also have this idea in my mind.
I wonder if the following patch will fix the issue?
--
diff --git a/include/linux/cgroup.h b/include/linux/cgroup.h
index 4598e4da6b1b..7eb51137d896 100644
--- a/include/linux/cgroup.h
+++ b/include/linux/cgroup.h
@@ -942,12 +942,14 @@ static inline bool cgroup_task_frozen(struct task_struct *task)
#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_BPF
static inline void cgroup_bpf_get(struct cgroup *cgrp)
{
- percpu_ref_get(&cgrp->bpf.refcnt);
+ if (!(cgrp->self.flags & CSS_NO_REF))
+ percpu_ref_get(&cgrp->bpf.refcnt);
}
static inline void cgroup_bpf_put(struct cgroup *cgrp)
{
- percpu_ref_put(&cgrp->bpf.refcnt);
+ if (!(cgrp->self.flags & CSS_NO_REF))
+ percpu_ref_put(&cgrp->bpf.refcnt);
}
#else /* CONFIG_CGROUP_BPF */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-20 1:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-16 18:03 [Patch net] cgroup: fix cgroup_sk_alloc() for sk_clone_lock() Cong Wang
2020-06-18 1:44 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-18 19:19 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-18 19:36 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-18 21:09 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-18 21:26 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-18 22:45 ` Peter Geis
2020-06-19 6:40 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-19 19:51 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-20 0:45 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-20 0:51 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-20 3:31 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-20 7:52 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-20 16:04 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-23 22:21 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-26 5:23 ` Cameron Berkenpas
2020-06-26 17:58 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-26 22:03 ` Cameron Berkenpas
2020-06-27 22:59 ` Cameron Berkenpas
2020-06-30 22:16 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-27 23:41 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-30 22:22 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-30 22:48 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-07-01 1:18 ` Zefan Li
2020-07-02 4:48 ` Cong Wang
2020-07-02 8:12 ` Thomas Lamprecht
2020-07-02 16:02 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-07-02 16:24 ` Peter Geis
2020-07-03 1:17 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-20 0:51 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-20 1:00 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-20 1:14 ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2020-06-20 2:48 ` Zefan Li
2020-06-20 3:00 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-20 15:57 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-22 18:14 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-22 20:39 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-06-23 8:45 ` Zhang,Qiang
2020-06-23 17:56 ` Cong Wang
2020-06-23 8:54 ` Zhang,Qiang
2020-06-23 9:01 ` Zhang,Qiang
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=20200620011409.GG237539@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com \
--to=guro@fb.com \
--cc=cam@neo-zeon.de \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dsonck92@gmail.com \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=lufq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pgwipeout@gmail.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).