Re: [PATCH -next v7 5/5] md: protect md_thread with rcu

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

在 2023/04/26 11:20, Song Liu 写道:
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 4:54 AM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>

Our test reports a uaf for 'mddev->sync_thread':

T1                      T2
md_start_sync
  md_register_thread
  // mddev->sync_thread is set
                         raid1d
                          md_check_recovery
                           md_reap_sync_thread
                            md_unregister_thread
                             kfree

  md_wakeup_thread
   wake_up
   ->sync_thread was freed

Root cause is that there is a small windown between register thread and
wake up thread, where the thread can be freed concurrently.

Currently, a global spinlock 'pers_lock' is borrowed to protect
'mddev->thread', this problem can be fixed likewise, however, there are
similar problems elsewhere, and use a global lock for all the cases is
not good.

This patch protect all md_thread with rcu.

Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  block/blk-cgroup.c        |  3 ++
  drivers/md/md-bitmap.c    | 10 ++++--
  drivers/md/md-cluster.c   | 17 ++++++----
  drivers/md/md-multipath.c |  4 +--
  drivers/md/md.c           | 69 ++++++++++++++++++---------------------
  drivers/md/md.h           |  8 ++---
  drivers/md/raid1.c        |  7 ++--
  drivers/md/raid1.h        |  2 +-
  drivers/md/raid10.c       | 20 +++++++-----
  drivers/md/raid10.h       |  2 +-
  drivers/md/raid5-cache.c  | 22 ++++++++-----
  drivers/md/raid5.c        | 15 +++++----
  drivers/md/raid5.h        |  2 +-
  13 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c
index 1c1ebeb51003..0ecb4cce8af2 100644
--- a/block/blk-cgroup.c
+++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c
@@ -527,6 +527,9 @@ static void blkg_destroy_all(struct gendisk *disk)
         list_for_each_entry_safe(blkg, n, &q->blkg_list, q_node) {
                 struct blkcg *blkcg = blkg->blkcg;

+               if (hlist_unhashed(&blkg->blkcg_node))
+                       continue;
+

This change is not related, right?

Yes, it's not related. Sorry that I missed another fix patch into
this...


I don't think we can rush this change in the 6.4 merge window. Let's
test it more thoroughly and ship it in the next merge window.

Of course.

Thanks,
Kuai




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux