Unlocked access to dst_rq->curr in task_numa_compare() is racy.
If curr task is exiting this may be a reason of use-after-free:
task_numa_compare() do_exit()
rcu_read_lock() schedule()
cur = ACCESS_ONCE(dst_rq->curr) ...
... rq->curr = next;
... context_switch()
... finish_task_switch()
... put_task_struct()
... __put_task_struct()
...
free_task_struct()
task_numa_assign() ...
get_task_struct() ...
As noted by Oleg:
<<The lockless get_task_struct(tsk) is only safe if tsk == current
and didn't pass exit_notify(), or if this tsk was found on a rcu
protected list (say, for_each_process() or find_task_by_vpid()).
IOW, it is only safe if release_task() was not called before we
take rcu_read_lock(), in this case we can rely on the fact that
delayed_put_pid() can not drop the (potentially) last reference
until rcu_read_unlock().
And as Kirill pointed out task_numa_compare()->task_numa_assign()
path does get_task_struct(dst_rq->curr) and this is not safe. The
task_struct itself can't go away, but rcu_read_lock() can't save
us from the final put_task_struct() in finish_task_switch(); this
reference goes away without rcu gp>>
The patch makes 3-stage check of dst_rq->curr; it ensures we've taken
the curr before delayed_put_task_struct() is called to put it. If so,
we may use the cur like we'd taken it from RCU-protected list.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 0b069bf..ffc7c3b 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -1147,6 +1147,44 @@ static bool load_too_imbalanced(long src_load, long
dst_load,
}
/*
+ * Return rq->curr if it is not exiting (delayed_put_task_struct() for it
+ * hasn't been called yet). If result is not NULL, it's safe to use it
+ * like it'd be picked from RCU-protected list (use get_task_struct() etc).
+ */
+static struct task_struct *rq_curr_if_not_exiting(struct rq *rq)
+{
+ struct task_struct *cur = ACCESS_ONCE(rq->curr);
+ unsigned int flags;
+
+ rcu_lockdep_assert(rcu_read_lock_held(), "RCU lock must be held");
+
+ /* This memory may become unmapped, so we can't read it directly */
+ if (probe_kernel_read(&flags, &cur->flags, sizeof(flags)) < 0)
+ return NULL;
+
+ if (flags & PF_EXITING)
+ return NULL;
+
+ smp_rmb(); /* Pairs with smp_mb() in do_exit() */
+
+ /*
+ * We've reached here. Three situations are possible:
+ * 1)cur has gone, and dst_rq->curr is pointing to other memory.
+ * In this case the check will fail;
+ * 2)cur is pointing to a new task, which is using the memory of
+ * just gone and freed cur (and it is new dst_rq->curr). It is
+ * OK, because we've locked RCU even before the new task has been
+ * created (so delayed_put_task_struct() hasn't been called yet);
+ * 3)we've taken a not exiting task (likely case). No need to worry.
+ * The above checks are necessary only for this case.
+ */
+ if (cur != ACCESS_ONCE(rq->curr))
+ cur = NULL;
+
+ return cur;
+}
+
+/*
* This checks if the overall compute and NUMA accesses of the system would
* be improved if the source tasks was migrated to the target dst_cpu taking
* into account that it might be best if task running on the dst_cpu should
@@ -1164,8 +1202,9 @@ static void task_numa_compare(struct task_numa_env *env,
long moveimp = imp;
rcu_read_lock();
- cur = ACCESS_ONCE(dst_rq->curr);
- if (cur->pid == 0) /* idle */
+ cur = rq_curr_if_not_exiting(dst_rq);
+
+ if (cur && is_idle_task(cur))
cur = NULL;
/*
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
