linux-kernel - Re: Ugly rmap NULL ptr deref oopsie on hibernate (was Linux 2.6.34-rc3)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004021705420.3634@i5.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 2 Apr 2010 17:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
	sgunderson@...foot.com
Subject: Re: Ugly rmap NULL ptr deref oopsie on hibernate (was Linux
 2.6.34-rc3)

On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Rik van Riel wrote:
> 
> Interesting that it is a null pointer dereference, given
> that we do not zero out the anon_vma_chain structs before
> freeing them.
> 
> Page_referenced_anon() takes the anon_vma->lock before
> walking the list.  The three places where we modify the
> anon_vma_chain->same_anon_vma list, we also hold the
> lock.

So let's look at the individual anon_vma_chain entries instead.

What is the protection of the 'vma->anon_vma_chain' list? In 
anon_vma_prepare(), the code implies that it is the page_table_lock, but 
what about anon_vma_clone()? If I'm reading it correctly, it is some odd 
mix of "mmap_sem held for writing" or "mmap_sem held for reading _and_ 
page_table_lock". And then we have the exit case that apparently has no 
locking at all, but that should hopefully be single-threaded.

That thing is subtle. A few more comments about the locking would be good, 
so that people like me wouldn't have to try to guess the rules from 
reading the source.

> There has to be a reason why a very heavy AIM7 workload
> and some other stress tests did not trigger it, but a few
> people are able to trigger it on their systems...

I don't think AIM7 is at all a very interesting workload, and not likely 
to stress anything at all. Did your AIM7 test actually cause heavy 
swapping? I doubt it. 

Page swapout is where a lot of the magic happens, since that happens 
without mmap_sem held etc. 

			Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/