From patchwork Wed Oct 25 20:56:11 2023 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo X-Patchwork-Id: 1855329 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@legolas.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: legolas.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=lists.ubuntu.com (client-ip=185.125.189.65; helo=lists.ubuntu.com; envelope-from=kernel-team-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com; receiver=patchwork.ozlabs.org) Received: from lists.ubuntu.com (lists.ubuntu.com [185.125.189.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by legolas.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4SG1T22pv9z23jV for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:57:10 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.ubuntu.com) by lists.ubuntu.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qvkvz-0003qr-K3; Wed, 25 Oct 2023 20:56:59 +0000 Received: from smtp-relay-canonical-0.internal ([10.131.114.83] helo=smtp-relay-canonical-0.canonical.com) by lists.ubuntu.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qvkvZ-0003gd-6F for kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com; Wed, 25 Oct 2023 20:56:33 +0000 Received: from quatroqueijos.lan (1.general.cascardo.us.vpn [10.172.70.58]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay-canonical-0.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 883353F2FE for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2023 20:56:31 +0000 (UTC) From: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo To: kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com Subject: [SRU Lunar,Mantic] perf: Disallow mis-matched inherited group reads Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 17:56:11 -0300 Message-Id: <20231025205611.1626111-5-cascardo@canonical.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20231025205611.1626111-1-cascardo@canonical.com> References: <20231025205611.1626111-1-cascardo@canonical.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Kernel team discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kernel-team-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com Sender: "kernel-team" From: Peter Zijlstra Because group consistency is non-atomic between parent (filedesc) and children (inherited) events, it is possible for PERF_FORMAT_GROUP read() to try and sum non-matching counter groups -- with non-sensical results. Add group_generation to distinguish the case where a parent group removes and adds an event and thus has the same number, but a different configuration of events as inherited groups. This became a problem when commit fa8c269353d5 ("perf/core: Invert perf_read_group() loops") flipped the order of child_list and sibling_list. Previously it would iterate the group (sibling_list) first, and for each sibling traverse the child_list. In this order, only the group composition of the parent is relevant. By flipping the order the group composition of the child (inherited) events becomes an issue and the mis-match in group composition becomes evident. That said; even prior to this commit, while reading of a group that is not equally inherited was not broken, it still made no sense. (Ab)use ECHILD as error return to indicate issues with child process group composition. Fixes: fa8c269353d5 ("perf/core: Invert perf_read_group() loops") Reported-by: Budimir Markovic Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20231018115654.GK33217@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (cherry picked from commit 32671e3799ca2e4590773fd0e63aaa4229e50c06) CVE-2023-5717 Signed-off-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo --- include/linux/perf_event.h | 1 + kernel/events/core.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h index 29c92a0160c7..67724128f9ef 100644 --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h @@ -704,6 +704,7 @@ struct perf_event { /* The cumulative AND of all event_caps for events in this group. */ int group_caps; + unsigned int group_generation; struct perf_event *group_leader; /* * event->pmu will always point to pmu in which this event belongs. diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c index 991638292209..42133e9ea924 100644 --- a/kernel/events/core.c +++ b/kernel/events/core.c @@ -1959,6 +1959,7 @@ static void perf_group_attach(struct perf_event *event) list_add_tail(&event->sibling_list, &group_leader->sibling_list); group_leader->nr_siblings++; + group_leader->group_generation++; perf_event__header_size(group_leader); @@ -2149,6 +2150,7 @@ static void perf_group_detach(struct perf_event *event) if (leader != event) { list_del_init(&event->sibling_list); event->group_leader->nr_siblings--; + event->group_leader->group_generation++; goto out; } @@ -5445,7 +5447,7 @@ static int __perf_read_group_add(struct perf_event *leader, u64 read_format, u64 *values) { struct perf_event_context *ctx = leader->ctx; - struct perf_event *sub; + struct perf_event *sub, *parent; unsigned long flags; int n = 1; /* skip @nr */ int ret; @@ -5455,6 +5457,33 @@ static int __perf_read_group_add(struct perf_event *leader, return ret; raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&ctx->lock, flags); + /* + * Verify the grouping between the parent and child (inherited) + * events is still in tact. + * + * Specifically: + * - leader->ctx->lock pins leader->sibling_list + * - parent->child_mutex pins parent->child_list + * - parent->ctx->mutex pins parent->sibling_list + * + * Because parent->ctx != leader->ctx (and child_list nests inside + * ctx->mutex), group destruction is not atomic between children, also + * see perf_event_release_kernel(). Additionally, parent can grow the + * group. + * + * Therefore it is possible to have parent and child groups in a + * different configuration and summing over such a beast makes no sense + * what so ever. + * + * Reject this. + */ + parent = leader->parent; + if (parent && + (parent->group_generation != leader->group_generation || + parent->nr_siblings != leader->nr_siblings)) { + ret = -ECHILD; + goto unlock; + } /* * Since we co-schedule groups, {enabled,running} times of siblings @@ -5488,8 +5517,9 @@ static int __perf_read_group_add(struct perf_event *leader, values[n++] = atomic64_read(&sub->lost_samples); } +unlock: raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ctx->lock, flags); - return 0; + return ret; } static int perf_read_group(struct perf_event *event, @@ -5508,10 +5538,6 @@ static int perf_read_group(struct perf_event *event, values[0] = 1 + leader->nr_siblings; - /* - * By locking the child_mutex of the leader we effectively - * lock the child list of all siblings.. XXX explain how. - */ mutex_lock(&leader->child_mutex); ret = __perf_read_group_add(leader, read_format, values); @@ -13365,6 +13391,7 @@ static int inherit_group(struct perf_event *parent_event, !perf_get_aux_event(child_ctr, leader)) return -EINVAL; } + leader->group_generation = parent_event->group_generation; return 0; }