Patch "ptr_ring: add barriers" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree

Patch "ptr_ring: add barriers" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree

[gregkh]

This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    ptr_ring: add barriers

to the 4.9-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     ptr_ring-add-barriers.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.9 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From foo@baz Sun Dec 31 11:13:15 CET 2017
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 21:29:37 +0200
Subject: ptr_ring: add barriers

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>


[ Upstream commit a8ceb5dbfde1092b466936bca0ff3be127ecf38e ]

Users of ptr_ring expect that it's safe to give the
data structure a pointer and have it be available
to consumers, but that actually requires an smb_wmb
or a stronger barrier.

In absence of such barriers and on architectures that reorder writes,
consumer might read an un=initialized value from an skb pointer stored
in the skb array.  This was observed causing crashes.

To fix, add memory barriers.  The barrier we use is a wmb, the
assumption being that producers do not need to read the value so we do
not need to order these reads.

Reported-by: George Cherian <george.cherian@cavium.com>
Suggested-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 include/linux/ptr_ring.h |    9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

--- a/include/linux/ptr_ring.h
+++ b/include/linux/ptr_ring.h
@@ -99,12 +99,18 @@ static inline bool ptr_ring_full_bh(stru
 
 /* Note: callers invoking this in a loop must use a compiler barrier,
  * for example cpu_relax(). Callers must hold producer_lock.
+ * Callers are responsible for making sure pointer that is being queued
+ * points to a valid data.
  */
 static inline int __ptr_ring_produce(struct ptr_ring *r, void *ptr)
 {
 	if (unlikely(!r->size) || r->queue[r->producer])
 		return -ENOSPC;
 
+	/* Make sure the pointer we are storing points to a valid data. */
+	/* Pairs with smp_read_barrier_depends in __ptr_ring_consume. */
+	smp_wmb();
+
 	r->queue[r->producer++] = ptr;
 	if (unlikely(r->producer >= r->size))
 		r->producer = 0;
@@ -244,6 +250,9 @@ static inline void *__ptr_ring_consume(s
 	if (ptr)
 		__ptr_ring_discard_one(r);
 
+	/* Make sure anyone accessing data through the pointer is up to date. */
+	/* Pairs with smp_wmb in __ptr_ring_produce. */
+	smp_read_barrier_depends();
 	return ptr;
 }
 


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from mst@redhat.com are

queue-4.9/ptr_ring-add-barriers.patch