diff mbox series

libceph: protect pending flags in ceph_con_keepalive()

Message ID 20181227190842.GA19565@myunghoj-Precision-5530 (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series libceph: protect pending flags in ceph_con_keepalive() | expand

Commit Message

Myungho Jung Dec. 27, 2018, 7:08 p.m. UTC
con_flag_test_and_set() sets CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING and
CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING flags without protection in ceph_con_keepalive().
It triggers WARN_ON() in clear_standby() if the flags are set after
con_fault() changes connection state to CON_STATE_STANDBY. Move
con_flag_test_and_set() to be called before releasing the lock and store
the condition to check after the critical section.

Reported-by: syzbot+acdeb633f6211ccdf886@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com>
---
 net/ceph/messenger.c | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Ilya Dryomov Jan. 2, 2019, 3:42 p.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 8:08 PM Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> con_flag_test_and_set() sets CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING and
> CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING flags without protection in ceph_con_keepalive().
> It triggers WARN_ON() in clear_standby() if the flags are set after
> con_fault() changes connection state to CON_STATE_STANDBY. Move
> con_flag_test_and_set() to be called before releasing the lock and store
> the condition to check after the critical section.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+acdeb633f6211ccdf886@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com>
> ---
>  net/ceph/messenger.c | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> index 2f126eff275d..e15da22d4f37 100644
> --- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
> +++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> @@ -3216,12 +3216,16 @@ void ceph_msg_revoke_incoming(struct ceph_msg *msg)
>   */
>  void ceph_con_keepalive(struct ceph_connection *con)
>  {
> +       bool pending;
> +
>         dout("con_keepalive %p\n", con);
>         mutex_lock(&con->mutex);
>         clear_standby(con);
> +       pending = (con_flag_test_and_set(con,
> +                                        CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
> +                  con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0);
>         mutex_unlock(&con->mutex);
> -       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
> -           con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
> +       if (pending)
>                 queue_con(con);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ceph_con_keepalive);

Hi Myungho,

Were you able to reproduce?  If so, did you use the syzkaller output or
something else?

Thanks,

                Ilya
Myungho Jung Jan. 3, 2019, 3:50 a.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 04:42:47PM +0100, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 8:08 PM Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > con_flag_test_and_set() sets CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING and
> > CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING flags without protection in ceph_con_keepalive().
> > It triggers WARN_ON() in clear_standby() if the flags are set after
> > con_fault() changes connection state to CON_STATE_STANDBY. Move
> > con_flag_test_and_set() to be called before releasing the lock and store
> > the condition to check after the critical section.
> >
> > Reported-by: syzbot+acdeb633f6211ccdf886@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > Signed-off-by: Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  net/ceph/messenger.c | 8 ++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> > index 2f126eff275d..e15da22d4f37 100644
> > --- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
> > +++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> > @@ -3216,12 +3216,16 @@ void ceph_msg_revoke_incoming(struct ceph_msg *msg)
> >   */
> >  void ceph_con_keepalive(struct ceph_connection *con)
> >  {
> > +       bool pending;
> > +
> >         dout("con_keepalive %p\n", con);
> >         mutex_lock(&con->mutex);
> >         clear_standby(con);
> > +       pending = (con_flag_test_and_set(con,
> > +                                        CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
> > +                  con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0);
> >         mutex_unlock(&con->mutex);
> > -       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
> > -           con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
> > +       if (pending)
> >                 queue_con(con);
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ceph_con_keepalive);
> 
> Hi Myungho,
> 
> Were you able to reproduce?  If so, did you use the syzkaller output or
> something else?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>                 Ilya
Hi Ilya,

I reproduced on vm using syzkaller utils and verified the fix by syzbot.

Thanks,
Myungho
Ilya Dryomov Jan. 14, 2019, 8:37 p.m. UTC | #3
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 4:50 AM Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com> wrote:
> I reproduced on vm using syzkaller utils and verified the fix by syzbot.

Hi Myungho,

I think this might be a better fix:

diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c
index d5718284db57..c5f5313e3537 100644
--- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
+++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
@@ -3205,10 +3205,11 @@ void ceph_con_keepalive(struct ceph_connection *con)
 {
        dout("con_keepalive %p\n", con);
        mutex_lock(&con->mutex);
+       con_flag_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING);
        clear_standby(con);
        mutex_unlock(&con->mutex);
-       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
-           con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
+
+       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
                queue_con(con);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(ceph_con_keepalive);

WRITE_PENDING can be set without con->mutex held from socket callbacks.
This is the reason we use atomic bit ops here, so testing WRITE_PENDING
under the lock didn't make sense to me.

At the same time, KEEPALIVE_PENDING could have been a non-atomic flag.
I spent some time trying to make sense of conditioning queue_con() call
on the previous value of KEEPALIVE_PENDING and couldn't see any, so I'm
setting it with con_flag_set(), making ceph_con_keepalive() symmetric
with ceph_con_send().

Thanks,

                Ilya
Myungho Jung Jan. 15, 2019, 6:55 a.m. UTC | #4
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 09:37:25PM +0100, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 4:50 AM Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I reproduced on vm using syzkaller utils and verified the fix by syzbot.
> 
> Hi Myungho,
> 
> I think this might be a better fix:
> 
> diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> index d5718284db57..c5f5313e3537 100644
> --- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
> +++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> @@ -3205,10 +3205,11 @@ void ceph_con_keepalive(struct ceph_connection *con)
>  {
>         dout("con_keepalive %p\n", con);
>         mutex_lock(&con->mutex);
> +       con_flag_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING);
>         clear_standby(con);
>         mutex_unlock(&con->mutex);
> -       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
> -           con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
> +
> +       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
>                 queue_con(con);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ceph_con_keepalive);
> 
> WRITE_PENDING can be set without con->mutex held from socket callbacks.
> This is the reason we use atomic bit ops here, so testing WRITE_PENDING
> under the lock didn't make sense to me.
> 
> At the same time, KEEPALIVE_PENDING could have been a non-atomic flag.
> I spent some time trying to make sense of conditioning queue_con() call
> on the previous value of KEEPALIVE_PENDING and couldn't see any, so I'm
> setting it with con_flag_set(), making ceph_con_keepalive() symmetric
> with ceph_con_send().
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>                 Ilya

Hi Ilya,

Yes, it looks clear and makes sense to have an atomic operation in if statement
but it still triggers warning. KEEPALIVE_PENDING should be set after
clear_standby() because con_fault() can be called right before acquiring the
lock here which sets the flag in standby state. I tesed the change with syzbot
and confirmed there was no warning.

Thanks,
Myungho
Ilya Dryomov Jan. 15, 2019, 10:17 a.m. UTC | #5
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 7:56 AM Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 09:37:25PM +0100, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 4:50 AM Myungho Jung <mhjungk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I reproduced on vm using syzkaller utils and verified the fix by syzbot.
> >
> > Hi Myungho,
> >
> > I think this might be a better fix:
> >
> > diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> > index d5718284db57..c5f5313e3537 100644
> > --- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
> > +++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> > @@ -3205,10 +3205,11 @@ void ceph_con_keepalive(struct ceph_connection *con)
> >  {
> >         dout("con_keepalive %p\n", con);
> >         mutex_lock(&con->mutex);
> > +       con_flag_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING);
> >         clear_standby(con);
> >         mutex_unlock(&con->mutex);
> > -       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
> > -           con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
> > +
> > +       if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
> >                 queue_con(con);
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ceph_con_keepalive);
> >
> > WRITE_PENDING can be set without con->mutex held from socket callbacks.
> > This is the reason we use atomic bit ops here, so testing WRITE_PENDING
> > under the lock didn't make sense to me.
> >
> > At the same time, KEEPALIVE_PENDING could have been a non-atomic flag.
> > I spent some time trying to make sense of conditioning queue_con() call
> > on the previous value of KEEPALIVE_PENDING and couldn't see any, so I'm
> > setting it with con_flag_set(), making ceph_con_keepalive() symmetric
> > with ceph_con_send().
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >                 Ilya
>
> Hi Ilya,
>
> Yes, it looks clear and makes sense to have an atomic operation in if statement
> but it still triggers warning. KEEPALIVE_PENDING should be set after
> clear_standby() because con_fault() can be called right before acquiring the
> lock here which sets the flag in standby state. I tesed the change with syzbot
> and confirmed there was no warning.

Right, it still triggers one of the warnings.  I was too focused on
WRITE_PENDING and missed that in plain sight.  I'll update the patch.

Thanks for testing!

                Ilya
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c
index 2f126eff275d..e15da22d4f37 100644
--- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
+++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
@@ -3216,12 +3216,16 @@  void ceph_msg_revoke_incoming(struct ceph_msg *msg)
  */
 void ceph_con_keepalive(struct ceph_connection *con)
 {
+	bool pending;
+
 	dout("con_keepalive %p\n", con);
 	mutex_lock(&con->mutex);
 	clear_standby(con);
+	pending = (con_flag_test_and_set(con,
+					 CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
+		   con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0);
 	mutex_unlock(&con->mutex);
-	if (con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_KEEPALIVE_PENDING) == 0 &&
-	    con_flag_test_and_set(con, CON_FLAG_WRITE_PENDING) == 0)
+	if (pending)
 		queue_con(con);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(ceph_con_keepalive);