mm/mmu_notifier: use hlist_add_head_rcu()

Make mmu_notifier_register() safer by issuing a memory barrier before
registering a new notifier.  This fixes a theoretical bug on weakly
ordered CPUs.  For example, take this simplified use of notifiers by a
driver:

	my_struct->mn.ops = &my_ops; /* (1) */
	mmu_notifier_register(&my_struct->mn, mm)
		...
		hlist_add_head(&mn->hlist, &mm->mmu_notifiers); /* (2) */
		...

Once mmu_notifier_register() releases the mm locks, another thread can
invalidate a range:

	mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()
		...
		hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(mn, &mm->mmu_notifiers, hlist) {
			if (mn->ops->invalidate_range)

The read side relies on the data dependency between mn and ops to ensure
that the pointer is properly initialized.  But the write side doesn't have
any dependency between (1) and (2), so they could be reordered and the
readers could dereference an invalid mn->ops.  mmu_notifier_register()
does take all the mm locks before adding to the hlist, but those have
acquire semantics which isn't sufficient.

By calling hlist_add_head_rcu() instead of hlist_add_head() we update the
hlist using a store-release, ensuring that readers see prior
initialization of my_struct.  This situation is better illustated by
litmus test MP+onceassign+derefonce.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Fixes: cddb8a5 ("mmu-notifiers: core")
Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <[email protected]>
Cc: Jérôme Glisse <[email protected]>
Cc: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

mm/mmu_notifier.c

@@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ static int do_mmu_notifier_register(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 	 * thanks to mm_take_all_locks().
 	 */
 	spin_lock(&mm->mmu_notifier_mm->lock);
-	hlist_add_head(&mn->hlist, &mm->mmu_notifier_mm->list);
+	hlist_add_head_rcu(&mn->hlist, &mm->mmu_notifier_mm->list);
 	spin_unlock(&mm->mmu_notifier_mm->lock);
 
 	mm_drop_all_locks(mm);