linux-kernel - Re: mm, something wring in page_lock_anon_vma

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 19 May 2017 19:02:17 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:     Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>
cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, aarcange@...hat.com,
        sumeet.keswani@....com, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: mm, something wring in page_lock_anon_vma_read()?

On Sat, 20 May 2017, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2017/5/20 6:00, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > 
> > You're ignoring the rcu_read_lock() on entry to page_lock_anon_vma_read(),
> > and the SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU (recently renamed SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU) nature
> > of the anon_vma_cachep kmem cache.  It is not safe to muck with anon_vma->
> > root in anon_vma_free(), others could still be looking at it.
> > 
> > Hugh
> > 
> 
> Hi Hugh,
> 
> Thanks for your reply.
> 
> SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU will let it call call_rcu() in free_slab(), but if the
> anon_vma *reuse* by someone again, access root_anon_vma is not safe, right?

That is safe, on reuse it is still a struct anon_vma; then the test for
!page_mapped(page) will show that it's no longer a reliable anon_vma for
this page, so page_lock_anon_vma_read() returns NULL.

But of course, if page->_mapcount has been corrupted or misaccounted,
it may think page_mapped(page) when actually page is not mapped,
and the anon_vma is not good for it.

> 
> e.g. if I clean the root pointer before free it, then access root_anon_vma
> in page_lock_anon_vma_read() is NULL pointer access, right?

Yes, cleaning root pointer before free may result in NULL pointer access.

Hugh

> 
> anon_vma_free()
> 	...
> 	anon_vma->root = NULL;
> 	kmem_cache_free(anon_vma_cachep, anon_vma);
> 	...
> 
> Thanks,
> Xishi Qiu