On 1/31/2017 9:21 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 31-01-17 20:08:57, Sahitya Tummala wrote:
Below is the synchronization issue between unmount and kjournald2
contexts, which results into use after free issue in kjournald2().
Fix this issue by using journal->j_state_lock to synchronize the
wait_event() done in journal_kill_thread() and the wake_up() done
in kjournald2().

TASK 1:
umount cmd:
    |--jbd2_journal_destroy() {
        |--journal_kill_thread() {
             write_lock(&journal->j_state_lock);
            journal->j_flags |= JBD2_UNMOUNT;
            ...
            write_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock);
            wake_up(&journal->j_wait_commit);       TASK 2 wakes up here:
                                                   kjournald2() {
                                                     ...
                                                     checks JBD2_UNMOUNT flag 
and calls goto end-loop;
                                                     ...
                                                     end_loop:
                                                       
write_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock);
                                                       journal->j_task = NULL; 
--> If this thread gets
                                                       pre-empted here, then 
TASK 1 wait_event will
                                                       exit even before this 
thread is completely
                                                       done.
            wait_event(journal->j_wait_done_commit, journal->j_task == NULL);
            ...
            write_lock(&journal->j_state_lock);
            write_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock);
          }
        |--kfree(journal);
      }
}
                                                       
wake_up(&journal->j_wait_done_commit); --> this step
                                                       now results into use 
after free issue.
                                                   }

Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <[email protected]>
Yeah, what you write looks possible (although rather unlikely). Thanks for
catching this. One small nit below:
Yes, it was observed only once and is very hard to reproduce.
diff --git a/fs/jbd2/journal.c b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
index a097048..f5cd3c0 100644
--- a/fs/jbd2/journal.c
+++ b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
@@ -278,9 +278,11 @@ static int kjournald2(void *arg)
  end_loop:
        write_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock);
        del_timer_sync(&journal->j_commit_timer);
+       write_lock(&journal->j_state_lock);
There's no good reason to do del_timer_sync() outside of j_state_lock. This
is not performance critical code and commit_timeout is trivial and cannot
block on anything. So just keep j_state_lock locked upto the place where
you unlock it now...

Sure, I will update the patch.
                                                                Honza
        journal->j_task = NULL;
        wake_up(&journal->j_wait_done_commit);
        jbd_debug(1, "Journal thread exiting.\n");
+       write_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock);
        return 0;
  }
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux 
Foundation Collaborative Project.



--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux 
Foundation Collaborative Project.

Reply via email to