From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mm/slab_common: Deleting kobject in kmem_cache_destroy() without holding slab_mutex/cpu_hotplug_lock
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 16:59:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220809205901.76595-1-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
A circular locking problem is reported by lockdep due to the following
circular locking dependency.
+--> cpu_hotplug_lock --> slab_mutex --> kn->active#126 --+
| |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
One way to break this circular locking chain is to avoid holding
cpu_hotplug_lock and slab_mutex while deleting the kobject in
sysfs_slab_unlink() which should be equivalent to doing a write_lock
and write_unlock pair of the kn->active virtual lock.
Since the kobject structures are not protected by slab_mutex or the
cpu_hotplug_lock, we can certainly release those locks before doing
the delete operation.
Move sysfs_slab_unlink() and sysfs_slab_release() to the newly
created kmem_cache_release() and call it outside the slab_mutex &
cpu_hotplug_lock critical sections.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
mm/slab_common.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
index 17996649cfe3..9274fb03563e 100644
--- a/mm/slab_common.c
+++ b/mm/slab_common.c
@@ -392,6 +392,30 @@ kmem_cache_create(const char *name, unsigned int size, unsigned int align,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmem_cache_create);
+#ifdef SLAB_SUPPORTS_SYSFS
+/*
+ * For a given kmem_cache, kmem_cache_destroy() should only be called
+ * once or there will be a use-after-free problem. The actual deletion
+ * and release of the kobject does not need slab_mutex or cpu_hotplug_lock
+ * protection. So they are now done without holding those locks.
+ */
+static void kmem_cache_release(struct kmem_cache *s, bool workfn)
+{
+ if (!workfn)
+ sysfs_slab_unlink(s);
+
+ if (workfn || !(s->flags & SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU))
+ sysfs_slab_release(s);
+ else
+ schedule_work(&slab_caches_to_rcu_destroy_work);
+}
+#else
+static inline void kmem_cache_release(struct kmem_cache *s, bool workfn)
+{
+ slab_kmem_cache_release(s);
+}
+#endif
+
static void slab_caches_to_rcu_destroy_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
{
LIST_HEAD(to_destroy);
@@ -418,11 +442,7 @@ static void slab_caches_to_rcu_destroy_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
list_for_each_entry_safe(s, s2, &to_destroy, list) {
debugfs_slab_release(s);
kfence_shutdown_cache(s);
-#ifdef SLAB_SUPPORTS_SYSFS
- sysfs_slab_release(s);
-#else
- slab_kmem_cache_release(s);
-#endif
+ kmem_cache_release(s, true);
}
}
@@ -437,20 +457,10 @@ static int shutdown_cache(struct kmem_cache *s)
list_del(&s->list);
if (s->flags & SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU) {
-#ifdef SLAB_SUPPORTS_SYSFS
- sysfs_slab_unlink(s);
-#endif
list_add_tail(&s->list, &slab_caches_to_rcu_destroy);
- schedule_work(&slab_caches_to_rcu_destroy_work);
} else {
kfence_shutdown_cache(s);
debugfs_slab_release(s);
-#ifdef SLAB_SUPPORTS_SYSFS
- sysfs_slab_unlink(s);
- sysfs_slab_release(s);
-#else
- slab_kmem_cache_release(s);
-#endif
}
return 0;
@@ -465,14 +475,16 @@ void slab_kmem_cache_release(struct kmem_cache *s)
void kmem_cache_destroy(struct kmem_cache *s)
{
+ int refcnt;
+
if (unlikely(!s) || !kasan_check_byte(s))
return;
cpus_read_lock();
mutex_lock(&slab_mutex);
- s->refcount--;
- if (s->refcount)
+ refcnt = --s->refcount;
+ if (refcnt)
goto out_unlock;
WARN(shutdown_cache(s),
@@ -481,6 +493,8 @@ void kmem_cache_destroy(struct kmem_cache *s)
out_unlock:
mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);
cpus_read_unlock();
+ if (!refcnt)
+ kmem_cache_release(s, false);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmem_cache_destroy);
--
2.31.1
next reply other threads:[~2022-08-09 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-09 20:59 Waiman Long [this message]
2022-08-09 22:25 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-09 23:05 ` Waiman Long
2022-08-10 9:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-08-10 14:08 ` Waiman Long
[not found] ` <ac08e3f6-f167-2382-5266-959e7339c04a@suse.cz>
2022-08-22 13:46 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
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=20220809205901.76595-1-longman@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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