lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  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:   Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:38:00 +0800
From:   "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        "Tim Chen" <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, jglisse@...hat.com,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -v5 RESEND] mm, swap: Fix race between swapoff and some swap operations

Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:

> On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 09:42:20 +0800 "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
>> 
>> When the swapin is performed, after getting the swap entry information
>> from the page table, system will swap in the swap entry, without any
>> lock held to prevent the swap device from being swapoff.  This may
>> cause the race like below,
>
> Sigh.  In terms of putting all the work into the swapoff path and
> avoiding overheads in the hot paths, I guess this is about as good as
> it will get.
>
> It's a very low-priority fix so I'd prefer to keep the patch in -mm
> until Hugh has had an opportunity to think about it.
>
>> ...
>>  
>> +/*
>> + * Check whether swap entry is valid in the swap device.  If so,
>> + * return pointer to swap_info_struct, and keep the swap entry valid
>> + * via preventing the swap device from being swapoff, until
>> + * put_swap_device() is called.  Otherwise return NULL.
>> + */
>> +struct swap_info_struct *get_swap_device(swp_entry_t entry)
>> +{
>> +	struct swap_info_struct *si;
>> +	unsigned long type, offset;
>> +
>> +	if (!entry.val)
>> +		goto out;
>> +	type = swp_type(entry);
>> +	if (type >= nr_swapfiles)
>> +		goto bad_nofile;
>> +	si = swap_info[type];
>> +
>> +	preempt_disable();
>
> This preempt_disable() is later than I'd expect.  If a well-timed race
> occurs, `si' could now be pointing at a defunct entry.  If that
> well-timed race include a swapoff AND a swapon, `si' could be pointing
> at the info for a new device?

struct swap_info_struct pointed to by swap_info[] will never be freed.
During swapoff, we only free the memory pointed to by the fields of
struct swap_info_struct.  And when swapon, we will always reuse
swap_info[type] if it's not NULL.  So it should be safe to dereference
swap_info[type] with preemption enabled.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

>> +	if (!(si->flags & SWP_VALID))
>> +		goto unlock_out;
>> +	offset = swp_offset(entry);
>> +	if (offset >= si->max)
>> +		goto unlock_out;
>> +
>> +	return si;
>> +bad_nofile:
>> +	pr_err("%s: %s%08lx\n", __func__, Bad_file, entry.val);
>> +out:
>> +	return NULL;
>> +unlock_out:
>> +	preempt_enable();
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ