Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: apparmor: WARNING: suspicious RCU usage | From | John Johansen <> | Date | Tue, 21 Sep 2021 14:23:19 -0700 |
| |
On 9/21/21 1:32 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Running with CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST triggers the following splat: > > [ 6.805926] ============================= > [ 6.806848] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage > [ 6.807738] 5.15.0-rc2+ #24 Tainted: G E > [ 6.808860] ----------------------------- > [ 6.809734] security/apparmor/include/lib.h:191 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!! > [ 6.811508] > other info that might help us debug this: > > [ 6.811516] > rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1 > [ 6.811527] 2 locks held by apparmor_parser/1897: > [ 6.811530] #0: ffff88885f139450 (sb_writers#7){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: ksys_write+0x68/0xe0 > [ 6.816110] #1: ffff8881000578a0 (&ns->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: aa_replace_profiles+0x16d/0x11e0 > [ 6.817418] > stack backtrace: > [ 6.818086] CPU: 38 PID: 1897 Comm: apparmor_parser Tainted: G E 5.15.0-rc2+ #24 > [ 6.819359] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.14.0-2 04/01/2014 > [ 6.820536] Call Trace: > [ 6.820918] dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x72 > [ 6.821499] __lookupn_profile+0x193/0x1a0 > [ 6.822461] aa_replace_profiles+0x395/0x11e0 > [ 6.823448] policy_update+0x13f/0x240 > [ 6.824326] profile_replace+0xb1/0x120 > [ 6.825213] vfs_write+0xe4/0x3b0 > [ 6.826027] ksys_write+0x68/0xe0 > [ 6.826576] do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > [ 6.827099] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > > which is pretty obvious because aa_replace_profile() invokes: > > __lookup_replace() > __lookup_profile() > __strn_find_child() > __policy_strn_find() > list_for_each_entry_rcu() <- Splat > > The code is "correct" as this is the writer side and holding ns->lock, > but it's incorrect to use list_for_each_entry_rcu() without being in a > read side critical section unless it is properly annotated. > > Same problem in the same function vs. __lookup_parent() and there are > more issues of that sort, e.g. vs. __lookup_profile() in > aa_remove_profiles(). > thanks Thomas, I look into it
| |