I performed a bisection and this issue starts with commit a363d27cdbc2
("tracing: Allow system call tracepoints to handle page faults") which
introduces this change.

> + *
> + * With @syscall=0, the tracepoint callback array dereference is
> + * protected by disabling preemption.
> + * With @syscall=1, the tracepoint callback array dereference is
> + * protected by Tasks Trace RCU, which allows probes to handle page
> + * faults.
>   */
>  #define __DO_TRACE(name, args, cond, syscall)                                
> \
>       do {                                                            \
> @@ -204,11 +212,17 @@ static inline struct tracepoint 
> *tracepoint_ptr_deref(tracepoint_ptr_t *p)
>               if (!(cond))                                            \
>                       return;                                         \
>                                                                       \
> -             preempt_disable_notrace();                              \
> +             if (syscall)                                            \
> +                     rcu_read_lock_trace();                          \
> +             else                                                    \
> +                     preempt_disable_notrace();                      \
>                                                                       \
>               __DO_TRACE_CALL(name, TP_ARGS(args));                   \
>                                                                       \
> -             preempt_enable_notrace();                               \
> +             if (syscall)                                            \
> +                     rcu_read_unlock_trace();                        \
> +             else                                                    \
> +                     preempt_enable_notrace();                       \
>       } while (0)

Link: 
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]/

I reproduced the bug locally by running syz-execprog inside a QEMU VM.

> ./syz-execprog -repeat=0 -procs=5 ./repro.syz.txt

I /think/ what is happening is that with this change preemption may now
occur leading to a scenario where the RCU grace period is insufficient
in a few places where call_rcu() is used. In other words, there are a
few scenarios where call_rcu_tasks_trace() should be used instead to
prevent a use-after-free bug when a preempted tracepoint call tries to
access a program, link, etc. that was freed. It seems the syzkaller
program induces page faults while attaching raw tracepoints to
sys_enter making preemption more likely to occur.

kernel/tracepoint.c
===================
> ...
> static inline void release_probes(struct tracepoint_func *old)
> {
>       ...
>       call_rcu(&tp_probes->rcu, rcu_free_old_probes); <-- Here
>       ...
> }
> ...

kernel/bpf/syscall.c
====================
> static void __bpf_prog_put_noref(struct bpf_prog *prog, bool deferred)
> {
>       bpf_prog_kallsyms_del_all(prog);
>       btf_put(prog->aux->btf);
>       module_put(prog->aux->mod);
>       kvfree(prog->aux->jited_linfo);
>       kvfree(prog->aux->linfo);
>       kfree(prog->aux->kfunc_tab);
>       if (prog->aux->attach_btf)
>               btf_put(prog->aux->attach_btf);
> 
>       if (deferred) {
>               if (prog->sleepable) <------ HERE: New condition needed?
>                       call_rcu_tasks_trace(&prog->aux->rcu, 
> __bpf_prog_put_rcu);
>               else
>                       call_rcu(&prog->aux->rcu, __bpf_prog_put_rcu);
>       } else {
>               __bpf_prog_put_rcu(&prog->aux->rcu);
>       }
> }
> 
> static void bpf_link_free(struct bpf_link *link)
> {
>       const struct bpf_link_ops *ops = link->ops;
>       bool sleepable = false;
> 
>       bpf_link_free_id(link->id);
>       if (link->prog) {
>               sleepable = link->prog->sleepable;
>               /* detach BPF program, clean up used resources */
>               ops->release(link);
>               bpf_prog_put(link->prog);
>       }
>       if (ops->dealloc_deferred) {
>               /* schedule BPF link deallocation; if underlying BPF program
>                * is sleepable, we need to first wait for RCU tasks trace
>                * sync, then go through "classic" RCU grace period
>                */
>               if (prog->sleepable) <------ HERE: New condition needed?
>                       call_rcu_tasks_trace(&link->rcu, 
> bpf_link_defer_dealloc_mult_rcu_gp);
>               else
>                       call_rcu(&link->rcu, bpf_link_defer_dealloc_rcu_gp);
>       } else if (ops->dealloc)
>               ops->dealloc(link);
> }

After patching things locally to ensure that call_rcu_tasks_trace() is
always used in these three places I was unable to induce a KASAN bug
to occur whereas before it happened pretty much every time I ran 
./sys-execprog within a minute or so.

I'm a bit unsure about the actual conditions under which
call_rcu_tasks_trace() should be used here though. Should there perhaps
be another condition such as `preemptable` which is used to determine
if call_rcu_tasks_trace() or call_rcu() should be used to free
links/programs? Is there any harm in just using call_rcu_tasks_trace()
every time in combination with rcu_trace_implies_rcu_gp() like it is
in bpf_link_defer_dealloc_mult_rcu_gp()?

> static void bpf_link_defer_dealloc_mult_rcu_gp(struct rcu_head *rcu)?
> {
>       if (rcu_trace_implies_rcu_gp())
>               bpf_link_defer_dealloc_rcu_gp(rcu);
>       else
>               call_rcu(rcu, bpf_link_defer_dealloc_rcu_gp);
> }

- Jordan

Reply via email to