The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 6d816e088c359866f9867057e04f244c608c42fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jens Axboe axboe@kernel.dk Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 08:04:14 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] io_uring: hold 'ctx' reference around task_work queue + execute
We're holding the request reference, but we need to go one higher to ensure that the ctx remains valid after the request has finished. If the ring is closed with pending task_work inflight, and the given io_kiocb finishes sync during issue, then we need a reference to the ring itself around the task_work execution cycle.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.7+ Reported-by: syzbot+9b260fc33297966f5a8e@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe axboe@kernel.dk
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c index 5488698189da..99582cf5106b 100644 --- a/fs/io_uring.c +++ b/fs/io_uring.c @@ -1821,8 +1821,10 @@ static void __io_req_task_submit(struct io_kiocb *req) static void io_req_task_submit(struct callback_head *cb) { struct io_kiocb *req = container_of(cb, struct io_kiocb, task_work); + struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
__io_req_task_submit(req); + percpu_ref_put(&ctx->refs); }
static void io_req_task_queue(struct io_kiocb *req) @@ -1830,6 +1832,7 @@ static void io_req_task_queue(struct io_kiocb *req) int ret;
init_task_work(&req->task_work, io_req_task_submit); + percpu_ref_get(&req->ctx->refs);
ret = io_req_task_work_add(req, &req->task_work); if (unlikely(ret)) { @@ -2318,6 +2321,8 @@ static void io_rw_resubmit(struct callback_head *cb) refcount_inc(&req->refs); io_queue_async_work(req); } + + percpu_ref_put(&ctx->refs); } #endif
@@ -2330,6 +2335,8 @@ static bool io_rw_reissue(struct io_kiocb *req, long res) return false;
init_task_work(&req->task_work, io_rw_resubmit); + percpu_ref_get(&req->ctx->refs); + ret = io_req_task_work_add(req, &req->task_work); if (!ret) return true; @@ -3033,6 +3040,8 @@ static int io_async_buf_func(struct wait_queue_entry *wait, unsigned mode, list_del_init(&wait->entry);
init_task_work(&req->task_work, io_req_task_submit); + percpu_ref_get(&req->ctx->refs); + /* submit ref gets dropped, acquire a new one */ refcount_inc(&req->refs); ret = io_req_task_work_add(req, &req->task_work); @@ -4565,6 +4574,8 @@ static int __io_async_wake(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_poll_iocb *poll,
req->result = mask; init_task_work(&req->task_work, func); + percpu_ref_get(&req->ctx->refs); + /* * If this fails, then the task is exiting. When a task exits, the * work gets canceled, so just cancel this request as well instead @@ -4652,11 +4663,13 @@ static void io_poll_task_handler(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_kiocb **nxt) static void io_poll_task_func(struct callback_head *cb) { struct io_kiocb *req = container_of(cb, struct io_kiocb, task_work); + struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx; struct io_kiocb *nxt = NULL;
io_poll_task_handler(req, &nxt); if (nxt) __io_req_task_submit(nxt); + percpu_ref_put(&ctx->refs); }
static int io_poll_double_wake(struct wait_queue_entry *wait, unsigned mode, @@ -4752,6 +4765,7 @@ static void io_async_task_func(struct callback_head *cb)
if (io_poll_rewait(req, &apoll->poll)) { spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->completion_lock); + percpu_ref_put(&ctx->refs); return; }
@@ -4767,6 +4781,7 @@ static void io_async_task_func(struct callback_head *cb) else __io_req_task_cancel(req, -ECANCELED);
+ percpu_ref_put(&ctx->refs); kfree(apoll->double_poll); kfree(apoll); }
On 8/17/20 3:44 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
Here's a 5.8 version.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:10:04AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 3:44 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
Here's a 5.8 version.
Applied, thanks!
Looks like it applies to 5.7 too, want me to take this for that as well?
greg k-h
On 8/17/20 6:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:10:04AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 3:44 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
Here's a 5.8 version.
Applied, thanks!
Looks like it applies to 5.7 too, want me to take this for that as well?
Heh, didn't see this email, just going through this by kernel revision. Either one should work, sent a specific set for that too.
BTW, for both 5.7 and 5.8, could you please queue up:
commit ebf0d100df0731901c16632f78d78d35f4123bc4 Author: Jens Axboe axboe@kernel.dk Date: Thu Aug 13 09:01:38 2020 -0600
task_work: only grab task signal lock when needed
as well, to avoid a perf regression with the TWA_SIGNAL change? Thanks!
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:21:02AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 6:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:10:04AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 3:44 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
Here's a 5.8 version.
Applied, thanks!
Looks like it applies to 5.7 too, want me to take this for that as well?
Heh, didn't see this email, just going through this by kernel revision. Either one should work, sent a specific set for that too.
Oops, it did not build on 5.7, so I still need a working backport for that.
BTW, for both 5.7 and 5.8, could you please queue up:
commit ebf0d100df0731901c16632f78d78d35f4123bc4 Author: Jens Axboe axboe@kernel.dk Date: Thu Aug 13 09:01:38 2020 -0600
task_work: only grab task signal lock when needed
as well, to avoid a perf regression with the TWA_SIGNAL change? Thanks!
Also now queued up, thanks.
greg k-h
On 8/17/20 6:44 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:21:02AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 6:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:10:04AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 3:44 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
Here's a 5.8 version.
Applied, thanks!
Looks like it applies to 5.7 too, want me to take this for that as well?
Heh, didn't see this email, just going through this by kernel revision. Either one should work, sent a specific set for that too.
Oops, it did not build on 5.7, so I still need a working backport for that.
Maybe I missed that, in any case, here it is. This one is for 5.7, to be specific.
commit ebf0d100df0731901c16632f78d78d35f4123bc4 Author: Jens Axboe axboe@kernel.dk Date: Thu Aug 13 09:01:38 2020 -0600
task_work: only grab task signal lock when needed
as well, to avoid a perf regression with the TWA_SIGNAL change? Thanks!
Also now queued up, thanks.
Thanks!
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:48:26AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 6:44 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:21:02AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 6:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:10:04AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 3:44 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
Here's a 5.8 version.
Applied, thanks!
Looks like it applies to 5.7 too, want me to take this for that as well?
Heh, didn't see this email, just going through this by kernel revision. Either one should work, sent a specific set for that too.
Oops, it did not build on 5.7, so I still need a working backport for that.
Maybe I missed that, in any case, here it is. This one is for 5.7, to be specific.
That worked, thanks!
greg k-h
On 8/17/20 6:55 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:48:26AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 6:44 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:21:02AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 6:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:10:04AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/17/20 3:44 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > The patch below does not apply to the 5.8-stable tree. > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit > id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
Here's a 5.8 version.
Applied, thanks!
Looks like it applies to 5.7 too, want me to take this for that as well?
Heh, didn't see this email, just going through this by kernel revision. Either one should work, sent a specific set for that too.
Oops, it did not build on 5.7, so I still need a working backport for that.
Maybe I missed that, in any case, here it is. This one is for 5.7, to be specific.
That worked, thanks!
Great, thanks. I think that concludes the stable fest from me this morning :-)
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org