linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: mhocko@kernel.org, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	guro@fb.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: [patch v3 for-4.17] mm, oom: fix concurrent munlock and oom reaper unmap
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:34:03 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1804241526320.238665@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1804241525280.238665@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

Since exit_mmap() is done without the protection of mm->mmap_sem, it is
possible for the oom reaper to concurrently operate on an mm until
MMF_OOM_SKIP is set.

This allows munlock_vma_pages_all() to concurrently run while the oom
reaper is operating on a vma.  Since munlock_vma_pages_range() depends on
clearing VM_LOCKED from vm_flags before actually doing the munlock to
determine if any other vmas are locking the same memory, the check for
VM_LOCKED in the oom reaper is racy.

This is especially noticeable on architectures such as powerpc where
clearing a huge pmd requires serialize_against_pte_lookup().  If the pmd
is zapped by the oom reaper during follow_page_mask() after the check for
pmd_none() is bypassed, this ends up deferencing a NULL ptl or a kernel
oops.

Fix this by manually freeing all possible memory from the mm before doing
the munlock and then setting MMF_OOM_SKIP.  The oom reaper can not run on
the mm anymore so the munlock is safe to do in exit_mmap().  It also
matches the logic that the oom reaper currently uses for determining when
to set MMF_OOM_SKIP itself, so there's no new risk of excessive oom
killing.

This issue fixes CVE-2018-1000200.

Fixes: 212925802454 ("mm: oom: let oom_reap_task and exit_mmap run concurrently")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org [4.14+]
Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
---
 include/linux/oom.h |  2 ++
 mm/mmap.c           | 44 ++++++++++++++----------
 mm/oom_kill.c       | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
--- a/include/linux/oom.h
+++ b/include/linux/oom.h
@@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ static inline int check_stable_address_space(struct mm_struct *mm)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+void __oom_reap_task_mm(struct mm_struct *mm);
+
 extern unsigned long oom_badness(struct task_struct *p,
 		struct mem_cgroup *memcg, const nodemask_t *nodemask,
 		unsigned long totalpages);
diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
--- a/mm/mmap.c
+++ b/mm/mmap.c
@@ -3015,6 +3015,32 @@ void exit_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm)
 	/* mm's last user has gone, and its about to be pulled down */
 	mmu_notifier_release(mm);
 
+	if (unlikely(mm_is_oom_victim(mm))) {
+		/*
+		 * Manually reap the mm to free as much memory as possible.
+		 * Then, as the oom reaper does, set MMF_OOM_SKIP to disregard
+		 * this mm from further consideration.  Taking mm->mmap_sem for
+		 * write after setting MMF_OOM_SKIP will guarantee that the oom
+		 * reaper will not run on this mm again after mmap_sem is
+		 * dropped.
+		 *
+		 * Nothing can be holding mm->mmap_sem here and the above call
+		 * to mmu_notifier_release(mm) ensures mmu notifier callbacks in
+		 * __oom_reap_task_mm() will not block.
+		 *
+		 * This needs to be done before calling munlock_vma_pages_all(),
+		 * which clears VM_LOCKED, otherwise the oom reaper cannot
+		 * reliably test it.
+		 */
+		mutex_lock(&oom_lock);
+		__oom_reap_task_mm(mm);
+		mutex_unlock(&oom_lock);
+
+		set_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags);
+		down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
+		up_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
+	}
+
 	if (mm->locked_vm) {
 		vma = mm->mmap;
 		while (vma) {
@@ -3036,24 +3062,6 @@ void exit_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm)
 	/* update_hiwater_rss(mm) here? but nobody should be looking */
 	/* Use -1 here to ensure all VMAs in the mm are unmapped */
 	unmap_vmas(&tlb, vma, 0, -1);
-
-	if (unlikely(mm_is_oom_victim(mm))) {
-		/*
-		 * Wait for oom_reap_task() to stop working on this
-		 * mm. Because MMF_OOM_SKIP is already set before
-		 * calling down_read(), oom_reap_task() will not run
-		 * on this "mm" post up_write().
-		 *
-		 * mm_is_oom_victim() cannot be set from under us
-		 * either because victim->mm is already set to NULL
-		 * under task_lock before calling mmput and oom_mm is
-		 * set not NULL by the OOM killer only if victim->mm
-		 * is found not NULL while holding the task_lock.
-		 */
-		set_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags);
-		down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
-		up_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
-	}
 	free_pgtables(&tlb, vma, FIRST_USER_ADDRESS, USER_PGTABLES_CEILING);
 	tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, 0, -1);
 
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -469,7 +469,6 @@ bool process_shares_mm(struct task_struct *p, struct mm_struct *mm)
 	return false;
 }
 
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
 /*
  * OOM Reaper kernel thread which tries to reap the memory used by the OOM
@@ -480,16 +479,54 @@ static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(oom_reaper_wait);
 static struct task_struct *oom_reaper_list;
 static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(oom_reaper_lock);
 
-static bool __oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
+void __oom_reap_task_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
 {
-	struct mmu_gather tlb;
 	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
+
+	/*
+	 * Tell all users of get_user/copy_from_user etc... that the content
+	 * is no longer stable. No barriers really needed because unmapping
+	 * should imply barriers already and the reader would hit a page fault
+	 * if it stumbled over a reaped memory.
+	 */
+	set_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags);
+
+	for (vma = mm->mmap ; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
+		if (!can_madv_dontneed_vma(vma))
+			continue;
+
+		/*
+		 * Only anonymous pages have a good chance to be dropped
+		 * without additional steps which we cannot afford as we
+		 * are OOM already.
+		 *
+		 * We do not even care about fs backed pages because all
+		 * which are reclaimable have already been reclaimed and
+		 * we do not want to block exit_mmap by keeping mm ref
+		 * count elevated without a good reason.
+		 */
+		if (vma_is_anonymous(vma) || !(vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED)) {
+			const unsigned long start = vma->vm_start;
+			const unsigned long end = vma->vm_end;
+			struct mmu_gather tlb;
+
+			tlb_gather_mmu(&tlb, mm, start, end);
+			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(mm, start, end);
+			unmap_page_range(&tlb, vma, start, end, NULL);
+			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(mm, start, end);
+			tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, start, end);
+		}
+	}
+}
+
+static bool oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
 	bool ret = true;
 
 	/*
 	 * We have to make sure to not race with the victim exit path
 	 * and cause premature new oom victim selection:
-	 * __oom_reap_task_mm		exit_mm
+	 * oom_reap_task_mm		exit_mm
 	 *   mmget_not_zero
 	 *				  mmput
 	 *				    atomic_dec_and_test
@@ -534,39 +571,8 @@ static bool __oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
 
 	trace_start_task_reaping(tsk->pid);
 
-	/*
-	 * Tell all users of get_user/copy_from_user etc... that the content
-	 * is no longer stable. No barriers really needed because unmapping
-	 * should imply barriers already and the reader would hit a page fault
-	 * if it stumbled over a reaped memory.
-	 */
-	set_bit(MMF_UNSTABLE, &mm->flags);
-
-	for (vma = mm->mmap ; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
-		if (!can_madv_dontneed_vma(vma))
-			continue;
+	__oom_reap_task_mm(mm);
 
-		/*
-		 * Only anonymous pages have a good chance to be dropped
-		 * without additional steps which we cannot afford as we
-		 * are OOM already.
-		 *
-		 * We do not even care about fs backed pages because all
-		 * which are reclaimable have already been reclaimed and
-		 * we do not want to block exit_mmap by keeping mm ref
-		 * count elevated without a good reason.
-		 */
-		if (vma_is_anonymous(vma) || !(vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED)) {
-			const unsigned long start = vma->vm_start;
-			const unsigned long end = vma->vm_end;
-
-			tlb_gather_mmu(&tlb, mm, start, end);
-			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(mm, start, end);
-			unmap_page_range(&tlb, vma, start, end, NULL);
-			mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(mm, start, end);
-			tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, start, end);
-		}
-	}
 	pr_info("oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s), now anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lukB\n",
 			task_pid_nr(tsk), tsk->comm,
 			K(get_mm_counter(mm, MM_ANONPAGES)),
@@ -587,14 +593,13 @@ static void oom_reap_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
 	struct mm_struct *mm = tsk->signal->oom_mm;
 
 	/* Retry the down_read_trylock(mmap_sem) a few times */
-	while (attempts++ < MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES && !__oom_reap_task_mm(tsk, mm))
+	while (attempts++ < MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES && !oom_reap_task_mm(tsk, mm))
 		schedule_timeout_idle(HZ/10);
 
 	if (attempts <= MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES ||
 	    test_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags))
 		goto done;
 
-
 	pr_info("oom_reaper: unable to reap pid:%d (%s)\n",
 		task_pid_nr(tsk), tsk->comm);
 	debug_show_all_locks();

  reply	other threads:[~2018-04-24 22:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-17 22:46 [patch] " David Rientjes
2018-04-18  0:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-18  2:39   ` David Rientjes
2018-04-18  2:52     ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
2018-04-18  3:55       ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-18  4:11         ` David Rientjes
2018-04-18  4:47           ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-18  5:20             ` David Rientjes
2018-04-18  7:50       ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-18 11:49         ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-18 11:58           ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-18 13:25             ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-18 13:44               ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-18 14:28                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-18 19:14         ` David Rientjes
2018-04-19  6:35           ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-19 10:45             ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-19 11:04               ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-19 11:51                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-19 12:48                   ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-19 19:14               ` David Rientjes
2018-04-19 19:34             ` David Rientjes
2018-04-19 22:13               ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-20  8:23               ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-20 12:40                 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-22  3:22                   ` David Rientjes
2018-04-22  3:48                     ` [patch v2] mm, oom: fix concurrent munlock and oom reaperunmap Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-22 13:08                       ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-24  2:31                       ` David Rientjes
2018-04-24  5:11                         ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-24  5:35                           ` David Rientjes
2018-04-24 21:57                             ` [patch v2] mm, oom: fix concurrent munlock and oom reaper unmap Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-24 22:25                               ` David Rientjes
2018-04-24 22:34                                 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2018-04-24 23:19                                   ` [patch v3 for-4.17] " Michal Hocko
2018-04-24 13:04                         ` [patch v2] mm, oom: fix concurrent munlock and oom reaperunmap Michal Hocko
2018-04-24 20:01                           ` David Rientjes
2018-04-24 20:13                             ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-24 20:22                               ` David Rientjes
2018-04-24 20:31                                 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-24 21:07                                   ` David Rientjes
2018-04-24 23:08                                     ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-24 23:14                                       ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-22  3:45                 ` [patch v2] mm, oom: fix concurrent munlock and oom reaper unmap David Rientjes
2018-04-22 13:18                   ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-23 16:09                     ` Michal Hocko

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=alpine.DEB.2.21.1804241526320.238665@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
    --to=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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