From patchwork Tue Sep 3 17:45:59 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Andrii Nakryiko X-Patchwork-Id: 13789163 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 837461917D0; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 17:46:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725385581; cv=none; b=oS+uPLs+DCfhasqydfEvEAdFbQu99eepoLlxN07jpFIfHwenJuI9s/J36h2hVofBkXVm0X7b2Z+Os0v3rRv4en6Oyh8qqGUKwttEqNcNyAp3huff48niZJOtpCsNqX+bdmsN1F1PGegdCgd8muBndVc9r86VUUyivOygUbfv9KA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725385581; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Od2hK7f+p9OrwoA3Etz1Ku5j7OT1LnL7qqTaMaUPv3M=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=uEFaCgiavJBAADClCeR73bmAAJTvlZqPghiRlsTlOzOJmlzBkWDQ8gUWnc2hUyTgBTj7jcaow+FrIjEDw1PpHLYAWcsiHIpGXU4Mg3oYyLn6IJhS7Y9kbg0jH0J9trrDfTgbOD1eKe/taeokEMTYtfocMP5zQbcggQXSOnfcpsw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=dyMZEzMe; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="dyMZEzMe" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E96DCC4CEC6; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 17:46:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1725385581; bh=Od2hK7f+p9OrwoA3Etz1Ku5j7OT1LnL7qqTaMaUPv3M=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=dyMZEzMek0Ld2KoDhCgr9p7DhtmlN1ri51XVG/IozrLDGoLIQYhnEjcivG9aWHQF6 NN0wRc1HbxeLkoueLBgPSZYFhgiz5Z9bV6GN3vodOwHjAhh6Lpcv8mSxkoLv66ywYg YfYle/qNJBPZ/wiABePhe8WWeXsZGMdX9szPW1u6oZw06MFkf4bZEb/580LlmtZURp fkUdYci5Bvf+2jnoR2FbpL8KtMSYjWM5MagMwYc0ZrJg5dMYY9ZcMU0z91nNc6kjjw ZP4LAKWEBiAa2B5bbfQd8hLZNt2losVQ/ySslU/QmGtKC1S2MIuHVksmmViBRynSLt w/7/QfGnSlh6g== From: Andrii Nakryiko To: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, oleg@redhat.com Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, surenb@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrii Nakryiko Subject: [PATCH v5 4/8] uprobes: travers uprobe's consumer list locklessly under SRCU protection Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 10:45:59 -0700 Message-ID: <20240903174603.3554182-5-andrii@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.5 In-Reply-To: <20240903174603.3554182-1-andrii@kernel.org> References: <20240903174603.3554182-1-andrii@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 uprobe->register_rwsem is one of a few big bottlenecks to scalability of uprobes, so we need to get rid of it to improve uprobe performance and multi-CPU scalability. First, we turn uprobe's consumer list to a typical doubly-linked list and utilize existing RCU-aware helpers for traversing such lists, as well as adding and removing elements from it. For entry uprobes we already have SRCU protection active since before uprobe lookup. For uretprobe we keep refcount, guaranteeing that uprobe won't go away from under us, but we add SRCU protection around consumer list traversal. Lastly, to keep handler_chain()'s UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE handling simple, we remember whether any removal was requested during handler calls, but then we double-check the decision under a proper register_rwsem using consumers' filter callbacks. Handler removal is very rare, so this extra lock won't hurt performance, overall, but we also avoid the need for any extra protection (e.g., seqcount locks). Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko --- include/linux/uprobes.h | 10 +++- kernel/events/uprobes.c | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b/include/linux/uprobes.h index 9cf0dce62e4c..2785d1bedb74 100644 --- a/include/linux/uprobes.h +++ b/include/linux/uprobes.h @@ -29,13 +29,21 @@ struct page; #define MAX_URETPROBE_DEPTH 64 struct uprobe_consumer { + /* + * handler() can return UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE to signal the need to + * unregister uprobe for current process. If UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE is + * returned, filter() callback has to be implemented as well and it + * should return false to "confirm" the decision to uninstall uprobe + * for the current process. If filter() is omitted or returns true, + * UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE is effectively ignored. + */ int (*handler)(struct uprobe_consumer *self, struct pt_regs *regs); int (*ret_handler)(struct uprobe_consumer *self, unsigned long func, struct pt_regs *regs); bool (*filter)(struct uprobe_consumer *self, struct mm_struct *mm); - struct uprobe_consumer *next; + struct list_head cons_node; }; #ifdef CONFIG_UPROBES diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c index 8bdcdc6901b2..97e58d160647 100644 --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ struct uprobe { struct rw_semaphore register_rwsem; struct rw_semaphore consumer_rwsem; struct list_head pending_list; - struct uprobe_consumer *consumers; + struct list_head consumers; struct inode *inode; /* Also hold a ref to inode */ struct rcu_head rcu; loff_t offset; @@ -783,6 +783,7 @@ static struct uprobe *alloc_uprobe(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, uprobe->inode = inode; uprobe->offset = offset; uprobe->ref_ctr_offset = ref_ctr_offset; + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&uprobe->consumers); init_rwsem(&uprobe->register_rwsem); init_rwsem(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem); RB_CLEAR_NODE(&uprobe->rb_node); @@ -808,32 +809,19 @@ static struct uprobe *alloc_uprobe(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, static void consumer_add(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc) { down_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem); - uc->next = uprobe->consumers; - uprobe->consumers = uc; + list_add_rcu(&uc->cons_node, &uprobe->consumers); up_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem); } /* * For uprobe @uprobe, delete the consumer @uc. - * Return true if the @uc is deleted successfully - * or return false. + * Should never be called with consumer that's not part of @uprobe->consumers. */ -static bool consumer_del(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc) +static void consumer_del(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc) { - struct uprobe_consumer **con; - bool ret = false; - down_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem); - for (con = &uprobe->consumers; *con; con = &(*con)->next) { - if (*con == uc) { - *con = uc->next; - ret = true; - break; - } - } + list_del_rcu(&uc->cons_node); up_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem); - - return ret; } static int __copy_insn(struct address_space *mapping, struct file *filp, @@ -929,7 +917,8 @@ static bool filter_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm) bool ret = false; down_read(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem); - for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) { + list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, + srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) { ret = consumer_filter(uc, mm); if (ret) break; @@ -1125,18 +1114,29 @@ void uprobe_unregister(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc) int err; down_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem); - if (WARN_ON(!consumer_del(uprobe, uc))) { - err = -ENOENT; - } else { - err = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, NULL); - /* TODO : cant unregister? schedule a worker thread */ - if (unlikely(err)) - uprobe_warn(current, "unregister, leaking uprobe"); - } + consumer_del(uprobe, uc); + err = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, NULL); up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem); - if (!err) - put_uprobe(uprobe); + /* TODO : cant unregister? schedule a worker thread */ + if (unlikely(err)) { + uprobe_warn(current, "unregister, leaking uprobe"); + goto out_sync; + } + + put_uprobe(uprobe); + +out_sync: + /* + * Now that handler_chain() and handle_uretprobe_chain() iterate over + * uprobe->consumers list under RCU protection without holding + * uprobe->register_rwsem, we need to wait for RCU grace period to + * make sure that we can't call into just unregistered + * uprobe_consumer's callbacks anymore. If we don't do that, fast and + * unlucky enough caller can free consumer's memory and cause + * handler_chain() or handle_uretprobe_chain() to do an use-after-free. + */ + synchronize_srcu(&uprobes_srcu); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister); @@ -1214,13 +1214,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_register); int uprobe_apply(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc, bool add) { struct uprobe_consumer *con; - int ret = -ENOENT; + int ret = -ENOENT, srcu_idx; down_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem); - for (con = uprobe->consumers; con && con != uc ; con = con->next) - ; - if (con) - ret = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, add ? uc : NULL); + + srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu); + list_for_each_entry_srcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, + srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) { + if (con == uc) { + ret = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, add ? uc : NULL); + break; + } + } + srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx); + up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem); return ret; @@ -2085,10 +2092,12 @@ static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs) struct uprobe_consumer *uc; int remove = UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE; bool need_prep = false; /* prepare return uprobe, when needed */ + bool has_consumers = false; - down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); current->utask->auprobe = &uprobe->arch; - for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) { + + list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, + srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) { int rc = 0; if (uc->handler) { @@ -2101,17 +2110,24 @@ static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs) need_prep = true; remove &= rc; + has_consumers = true; } current->utask->auprobe = NULL; if (need_prep && !remove) prepare_uretprobe(uprobe, regs); /* put bp at return */ - if (remove && uprobe->consumers) { - WARN_ON(!uprobe_is_active(uprobe)); - unapply_uprobe(uprobe, current->mm); + if (remove && has_consumers) { + down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); + + /* re-check that removal is still required, this time under lock */ + if (!filter_chain(uprobe, current->mm)) { + WARN_ON(!uprobe_is_active(uprobe)); + unapply_uprobe(uprobe, current->mm); + } + + up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); } - up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); } static void @@ -2119,13 +2135,15 @@ handle_uretprobe_chain(struct return_instance *ri, struct pt_regs *regs) { struct uprobe *uprobe = ri->uprobe; struct uprobe_consumer *uc; + int srcu_idx; - down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); - for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) { + srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu); + list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, + srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) { if (uc->ret_handler) uc->ret_handler(uc, ri->func, regs); } - up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); + srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx); } static struct return_instance *find_next_ret_chain(struct return_instance *ri)