Re: [RFC PATCH v2 7/7] ext4: fix race between blkdev_releasepage() and ext4_put_super()
From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Date: 2021-04-16 08:00:59
Also in:
linux-fsdevel
Hi, Christoph On 2021/4/15 22:52, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 09:47:37PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:quoted
There still exist a use after free issue when accessing the journal structure and ext4_sb_info structure on freeing bdev buffers in bdev_try_to_free_page(). The problem is bdev_try_to_free_page() could be raced by ext4_put_super(), it dose freeing sb->s_fs_info and sbi->s_journal while release page progress are still accessing them. So it could end up trigger use-after-free or NULL pointer dereference.I think the right fix is to not even call into ->bdev_try_to_free_page unless the superblock is active. .
Thanks for your suggestions. Now, we use already use "if (bdev->bd_super)" to prevent call into ->bdev_try_to_free_page unless the super is alive, and the problem is bd_super becomes NULL concurrently after this check. So, IIUC, I think it's the same to switch to check the superblock is active or not. The acvive flag also could becomes inactive (raced by umount) after we call into bdev_try_to_free_page(). In order to close this race, One solution is introduce a lock to synchronize the active state between kill_block_super() and blkdev_releasepage(), but the releasing page process have to try to acquire this lock in blkdev_releasepage() for each page, and the umount process still need to wait until the page release if some one invoke into ->bdev_try_to_free_page(). I think this solution may affect performace and is not a good way. Think about it in depth, use percpu refcount seems have the smallest performance effect on blkdev_releasepage(). If you don't like the refcount, maybe we could add synchronize_rcu_expedited() in ext4_put_super(), it also could prevent this race. Any suggestions? Thanks, Yi.