linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: cma: honor __GFP_ZERO flag in cma

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:   Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:40:00 +0200
From:   Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: cma: honor __GFP_ZERO flag in cma_alloc()

Hi Matthew,

On 2018-06-13 14:24, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:58:37AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> cma_alloc() function has gfp mask parameter, so users expect that it
>> honors typical memory allocation related flags. The most imporant from
>> the security point of view is handling of __GFP_ZERO flag, because memory
>> allocated by this function usually can be directly remapped to userspace
>> by device drivers as a part of multimedia processing and ignoring this
>> flag might lead to leaking some kernel structures to userspace.
>> Some callers of this function (for example arm64 dma-iommu glue code)
>> already assumed that the allocated buffers are cleared when this flag
>> is set. To avoid such issues, add simple code for clearing newly
>> allocated buffer when __GFP_ZERO flag is set. Callers will be then
>> updated to skip implicit clearing or adjust passed gfp flags.
> I think the documentation for this function needs improving.  For example,
> GFP_ATOMIC does not work (it takes a mutex lock, so it can sleep).
> At the very least, the kernel-doc needs:
>
>   * Context: Process context (may sleep even if GFP flags indicate otherwise).
>
> Unless someone wants to rework this allocator to use spinlocks instead
> of mutexes ...

It is not only the matter of the spinlocks. GFP_ATOMIC is not supported 
by the
memory compaction code, which is used in alloc_contig_range(). Right, this
should be also noted in the documentation.

Best regards
-- 
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland