You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
1. With CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL=n static_key_slow_inc() doesn't have any
protection against key->enabled refcounter overflow.
2. With CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL=y static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked()
still may turn the refcounter negative as (v + 1) may overflow.
key->enabled is indeed a ref-counter as it's documented in multiple
places: top comment in jump_label.h, Documentation/staging/static-keys.rst,
etc.
As -1 is reserved for static key that's in process of being enabled,
functions would break with negative key->enabled refcount:
- for CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL=n negative return of static_key_count()
breaks static_key_false(), static_key_true()
- the ref counter may become 0 from negative side by too many
static_key_slow_inc() calls and lead to use-after-free issues.
These flaws result in that some users have to introduce an additional
mutex and prevent the reference counter from overflowing themselves,
see bpf_enable_runtime_stats() checking the counter against INT_MAX / 2.
Prevent the reference counter overflow by checking if (v + 1) > 0.
Change functions API to return whether the increment was successful.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Safonov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
0 commit comments