[ Upstream commit fd381ce60a ]
When there are concurrent uref release and bpf timer init operations,
the following sequence diagram is possible. It will break the guarantee
provided by bpf_timer: bpf_timer will still be alive after userspace
application releases or unpins the map. It also will lead to kmemleak
for old kernel version which doesn't release bpf_timer when map is
released.
bpf program X:
bpf_timer_init()
lock timer->lock
read timer->timer as NULL
read map->usercnt != 0
process Y:
close(map_fd)
// put last uref
bpf_map_put_uref()
atomic_dec_and_test(map->usercnt)
array_map_free_timers()
bpf_timer_cancel_and_free()
// just return
read timer->timer is NULL
t = bpf_map_kmalloc_node()
timer->timer = t
unlock timer->lock
Fix the problem by checking map->usercnt after timer->timer is assigned,
so when there are concurrent uref release and bpf timer init, either
bpf_timer_cancel_and_free() from uref release reads a no-NULL timer
or the newly-added atomic64_read() returns a zero usercnt.
Because atomic_dec_and_test(map->usercnt) and READ_ONCE(timer->timer)
in bpf_timer_cancel_and_free() are not protected by a lock, so add
a memory barrier to guarantee the order between map->usercnt and
timer->timer. Also use WRITE_ONCE(timer->timer, x) to match the lockless
read of timer->timer in bpf_timer_cancel_and_free().
Reported-by: Hsin-Wei Hung <hsinweih@uci.edu>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CABcoxUaT2k9hWsS1tNgXyoU3E-=PuOgMn737qK984fbFmfYixQ@mail.gmail.com
Fixes: b00628b1c7 ("bpf: Introduce bpf timers.")
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231030063616.1653024-1-houtao@huaweicloud.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
77bf9287c5