mirror of
https://github.com/hardkernel/linux.git
synced 2026-06-05 18:41:58 +09:00
0ee0062c94
mm->mm_lock_seq effectively functions as a read/write lock; therefore it
must be used with acquire/release semantics.
A specific example is the interaction between userfaultfd_register() and
lock_vma_under_rcu().
userfaultfd_register() does the following from the point where it changes
a VMA's flags to the point where concurrent readers are permitted again
(in a simple scenario where only a single private VMA is accessed and no
merging/splitting is involved):
userfaultfd_register
userfaultfd_set_vm_flags
vm_flags_reset
vma_start_write
down_write(&vma->vm_lock->lock)
vma->vm_lock_seq = mm_lock_seq [marks VMA as busy]
up_write(&vma->vm_lock->lock)
vm_flags_init
[sets VM_UFFD_* in __vm_flags]
vma->vm_userfaultfd_ctx.ctx = ctx
mmap_write_unlock
vma_end_write_all
WRITE_ONCE(mm->mm_lock_seq, mm->mm_lock_seq + 1) [unlocks VMA]
There are no memory barriers in between the __vm_flags update and the
mm->mm_lock_seq update that unlocks the VMA, so the unlock can be
reordered to above the `vm_flags_init()` call, which means from the
perspective of a concurrent reader, a VMA can be marked as a userfaultfd
VMA while it is not VMA-locked. That's bad, we definitely need a
store-release for the unlock operation.
The non-atomic write to vma->vm_lock_seq in vma_start_write() is mostly
fine because all accesses to vma->vm_lock_seq that matter are always
protected by the VMA lock. There is a racy read in vma_start_read()
though that can tolerate false-positives, so we should be using
WRITE_ONCE() to keep things tidy and data-race-free (including for KCSAN).
On the other side, lock_vma_under_rcu() works as follows in the relevant
region for locking and userfaultfd check:
lock_vma_under_rcu
vma_start_read
vma->vm_lock_seq == READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq) [early bailout]
down_read_trylock(&vma->vm_lock->lock)
vma->vm_lock_seq == READ_ONCE(vma->vm_mm->mm_lock_seq) [main check]
userfaultfd_armed
checks vma->vm_flags & __VM_UFFD_FLAGS
Here, the interesting aspect is how far down the mm->mm_lock_seq read can
be reordered - if this read is reordered down below the vma->vm_flags
access, this could cause lock_vma_under_rcu() to partly operate on
information that was read while the VMA was supposed to be locked. To
prevent this kind of downwards bleeding of the mm->mm_lock_seq read, we
need to read it with a load-acquire.
Some of the comment wording is based on suggestions by Suren.
BACKPORT WARNING: One of the functions changed by this patch (which I've
written against Linus' tree) is vma_try_start_write(), but this function
no longer exists in mm/mm-everything. I don't know whether the merged
version of this patch will be ordered before or after the patch that
removes vma_try_start_write(). If you're backporting this patch to a tree
with vma_try_start_write(), make sure this patch changes that function.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230721225107.942336-1-jannh@google.com
Fixes: 5e31275cc9 ("mm: add per-VMA lock and helper functions to control it")
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
(cherry picked from commit b1f02b9575)
Bug: 293665307
Change-Id: Ifbf30a8ee7211f9c7fe26b923ca33ffde68b6a7b
Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
How do I submit patches to Android Common Kernels
-
BEST: Make all of your changes to upstream Linux. If appropriate, backport to the stable releases. These patches will be merged automatically in the corresponding common kernels. If the patch is already in upstream Linux, post a backport of the patch that conforms to the patch requirements below.
- Do not send patches upstream that contain only symbol exports. To be considered for upstream Linux,
additions of
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()require an in-tree modular driver that uses the symbol -- so include the new driver or changes to an existing driver in the same patchset as the export. - When sending patches upstream, the commit message must contain a clear case for why the patch is needed and beneficial to the community. Enabling out-of-tree drivers or functionality is not not a persuasive case.
- Do not send patches upstream that contain only symbol exports. To be considered for upstream Linux,
additions of
-
LESS GOOD: Develop your patches out-of-tree (from an upstream Linux point-of-view). Unless these are fixing an Android-specific bug, these are very unlikely to be accepted unless they have been coordinated with kernel-team@android.com. If you want to proceed, post a patch that conforms to the patch requirements below.
Common Kernel patch requirements
- All patches must conform to the Linux kernel coding standards and pass
scripts/checkpatch.pl - Patches shall not break gki_defconfig or allmodconfig builds for arm, arm64, x86, x86_64 architectures (see https://source.android.com/setup/build/building-kernels)
- If the patch is not merged from an upstream branch, the subject must be tagged with the type of patch:
UPSTREAM:,BACKPORT:,FROMGIT:,FROMLIST:, orANDROID:. - All patches must have a
Change-Id:tag (see https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/user-changeid.html) - If an Android bug has been assigned, there must be a
Bug:tag. - All patches must have a
Signed-off-by:tag by the author and the submitter
Additional requirements are listed below based on patch type
Requirements for backports from mainline Linux: UPSTREAM:, BACKPORT:
- If the patch is a cherry-pick from Linux mainline with no changes at all
- tag the patch subject with
UPSTREAM:. - add upstream commit information with a
(cherry picked from commit ...)line - Example:
- if the upstream commit message is
- tag the patch subject with
important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
- then Joe Smith would upload the patch for the common kernel as
UPSTREAM: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
(cherry picked from commit c31e73121f4c1ec41143423ac6ce3ce6dafdcec1)
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
- If the patch requires any changes from the upstream version, tag the patch with
BACKPORT:instead ofUPSTREAM:.- use the same tags as
UPSTREAM: - add comments about the changes under the
(cherry picked from commit ...)line - Example:
- use the same tags as
BACKPORT: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
(cherry picked from commit c31e73121f4c1ec41143423ac6ce3ce6dafdcec1)
[joe: Resolved minor conflict in drivers/foo/bar.c ]
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
Requirements for other backports: FROMGIT:, FROMLIST:,
- If the patch has been merged into an upstream maintainer tree, but has not yet
been merged into Linux mainline
- tag the patch subject with
FROMGIT: - add info on where the patch came from as
(cherry picked from commit <sha1> <repo> <branch>). This must be a stable maintainer branch (not rebased, so don't uselinux-nextfor example). - if changes were required, use
BACKPORT: FROMGIT: - Example:
- if the commit message in the maintainer tree is
- tag the patch subject with
important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
- then Joe Smith would upload the patch for the common kernel as
FROMGIT: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
(cherry picked from commit 878a2fd9de10b03d11d2f622250285c7e63deace
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/foo/bar.git test-branch)
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
- If the patch has been submitted to LKML, but not accepted into any maintainer tree
- tag the patch subject with
FROMLIST: - add a
Link:tag with a link to the submittal on lore.kernel.org - add a
Bug:tag with the Android bug (required for patches not accepted into a maintainer tree) - if changes were required, use
BACKPORT: FROMLIST: - Example:
- tag the patch subject with
FROMLIST: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190619171517.GA17557@someone.com/
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
Requirements for Android-specific patches: ANDROID:
- If the patch is fixing a bug to Android-specific code
- tag the patch subject with
ANDROID: - add a
Fixes:tag that cites the patch with the bug - Example:
- tag the patch subject with
ANDROID: fix android-specific bug in foobar.c
This is the detailed description of the important fix
Fixes: 1234abcd2468 ("foobar: add cool feature")
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
- If the patch is a new feature
- tag the patch subject with
ANDROID: - add a
Bug:tag with the Android bug (required for android-specific features)
- tag the patch subject with