Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] jump_label: Prevent key->enabled int overflow

From: Jason Baron
Date: Mon Nov 14 2022 - 11:25:13 EST



On 11/11/22 16:23, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/jump_label.c b/kernel/jump_label.c
> index 714ac4c3b556..f2c1aa351d41 100644
> --- a/kernel/jump_label.c
> +++ b/kernel/jump_label.c
> @@ -113,11 +113,38 @@ int static_key_count(struct static_key *key)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(static_key_count);
>
> -void static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked(struct static_key *key)
> +/***
> + * static_key_fast_inc - adds a user for a static key
> + * @key: static key that must be already enabled
> + *
> + * The caller must make sure that the static key can't get disabled while
> + * in this function. It doesn't patch jump labels, only adds a user to
> + * an already enabled static key.
> + *
> + * Returns true if the increment was done.
> + */
> +bool static_key_fast_inc(struct static_key *key)
> {
> int v, v1;
>
> STATIC_KEY_CHECK_USE(key);
> + /*
> + * Negative key->enabled has a special meaning: it sends
> + * static_key_slow_inc() down the slow path, and it is non-zero
> + * so it counts as "enabled" in jump_label_update(). Note that
> + * atomic_inc_unless_negative() checks >= 0, so roll our own.
> + */
> + for (v = atomic_read(&key->enabled); v > 0 && (v + 1) > 0; v = v1) {
> + v1 = atomic_cmpxchg(&key->enabled, v, v + 1);
> + if (likely(v1 == v))
> + return true;
> + }
> + return false;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(static_key_fast_inc);
> +
> +bool static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked(struct static_key *key)
> +{
> lockdep_assert_cpus_held();
>
> /*
> @@ -126,17 +153,9 @@ void static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked(struct static_key *key)
> * jump_label_update() process. At the same time, however,
> * the jump_label_update() call below wants to see
> * static_key_enabled(&key) for jumps to be updated properly.
> - *
> - * So give a special meaning to negative key->enabled: it sends
> - * static_key_slow_inc() down the slow path, and it is non-zero
> - * so it counts as "enabled" in jump_label_update(). Note that
> - * atomic_inc_unless_negative() checks >= 0, so roll our own.
> */
> - for (v = atomic_read(&key->enabled); v > 0; v = v1) {
> - v1 = atomic_cmpxchg(&key->enabled, v, v + 1);
> - if (likely(v1 == v))
> - return;
> - }
> + if (static_key_fast_inc(key))
> + return true;
>
> jump_label_lock();
> if (atomic_read(&key->enabled) == 0) {
> @@ -148,16 +167,23 @@ void static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked(struct static_key *key)
> */
> atomic_set_release(&key->enabled, 1);
> } else {
> - atomic_inc(&key->enabled);
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(static_key_fast_inc(key))) {

Shouldn't that be negated to catch the overflow:

if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!static_key_fast_inc(key)))



> + jump_label_unlock();
> + return false;
> + }
> }
> jump_label_unlock();
> + return true;
> }
>
> -void static_key_slow_inc(struct static_key *key)
> +bool static_key_slow_inc(struct static_key *key)
> {
> + bool ret;
> +
> cpus_read_lock();
> - static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked(key);
> + ret = static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked(key);
> cpus_read_unlock();
> + return ret;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(static_key_slow_inc);
>