Skip to content

Commit 6dee745

Browse files
torvaldsgregkh
authored andcommitted
eventpoll: don't decrement ep refcount while still holding the ep mutex
commit 8c2e52e upstream. Jann Horn points out that epoll is decrementing the ep refcount and then doing a mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx); afterwards. That's very wrong, because it can lead to a use-after-free. That pattern is actually fine for the very last reference, because the code in question will delay the actual call to "ep_free(ep)" until after it has unlocked the mutex. But it's wrong for the much subtler "next to last" case when somebody *else* may also be dropping their reference and free the ep while we're still using the mutex. Note that this is true even if that other user is also using the same ep mutex: mutexes, unlike spinlocks, can not be used for object ownership, even if they guarantee mutual exclusion. A mutex "unlock" operation is not atomic, and as one user is still accessing the mutex as part of unlocking it, another user can come in and get the now released mutex and free the data structure while the first user is still cleaning up. See our mutex documentation in Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst, in particular the section [1] about semantics: "mutex_unlock() may access the mutex structure even after it has internally released the lock already - so it's not safe for another context to acquire the mutex and assume that the mutex_unlock() context is not using the structure anymore" So if we drop our ep ref before the mutex unlock, but we weren't the last one, we may then unlock the mutex, another user comes in, drops _their_ reference and releases the 'ep' as it now has no users - all while the mutex_unlock() is still accessing it. Fix this by simply moving the ep refcount dropping to outside the mutex: the refcount itself is atomic, and doesn't need mutex protection (that's the whole _point_ of refcounts: unlike mutexes, they are inherently about object lifetimes). Reported-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> Link: https://docs.kernel.org/locking/mutex-design.html#semantics [1] Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
1 parent 259f497 commit 6dee745

File tree

1 file changed

+5
-7
lines changed

1 file changed

+5
-7
lines changed

fs/eventpoll.c

Lines changed: 5 additions & 7 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -854,22 +854,22 @@ static bool __ep_remove(struct eventpoll *ep, struct epitem *epi, bool force)
854854
kfree_rcu(epi, rcu);
855855

856856
percpu_counter_dec(&ep->user->epoll_watches);
857-
return ep_refcount_dec_and_test(ep);
857+
return true;
858858
}
859859

860860
/*
861861
* ep_remove variant for callers owing an additional reference to the ep
862862
*/
863863
static void ep_remove_safe(struct eventpoll *ep, struct epitem *epi)
864864
{
865-
WARN_ON_ONCE(__ep_remove(ep, epi, false));
865+
if (__ep_remove(ep, epi, false))
866+
WARN_ON_ONCE(ep_refcount_dec_and_test(ep));
866867
}
867868

868869
static void ep_clear_and_put(struct eventpoll *ep)
869870
{
870871
struct rb_node *rbp, *next;
871872
struct epitem *epi;
872-
bool dispose;
873873

874874
/* We need to release all tasks waiting for these file */
875875
if (waitqueue_active(&ep->poll_wait))
@@ -902,10 +902,8 @@ static void ep_clear_and_put(struct eventpoll *ep)
902902
cond_resched();
903903
}
904904

905-
dispose = ep_refcount_dec_and_test(ep);
906905
mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx);
907-
908-
if (dispose)
906+
if (ep_refcount_dec_and_test(ep))
909907
ep_free(ep);
910908
}
911909

@@ -1108,7 +1106,7 @@ void eventpoll_release_file(struct file *file)
11081106
dispose = __ep_remove(ep, epi, true);
11091107
mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx);
11101108

1111-
if (dispose)
1109+
if (dispose && ep_refcount_dec_and_test(ep))
11121110
ep_free(ep);
11131111
goto again;
11141112
}

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)