| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 10:16:40 +0300
From: Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@...ia.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com, Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@...ia.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] kmemleak: Fix some false positives with special scan
From: Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@...ia.com>
There is the false positive that the pointer is calculated by other
methods than the usual container_of macro. "kmemleak_ignore" can cover
a false positive, but it would loose the advantage of kmemleak. This
patch allows kmemleak to work with such false positives by introducing
a new special memory block with a calculation formula. The client
module can register the area with a function, which kmemleak scan and
calculate the pointer with the function.
The typical use case could be the IOMMU first level pagetable which
stores the pointer to the second level of page table with
modification, for example, a physical address with attribution bits.
Signed-off-by: Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@...ia.com>
---
include/linux/kmemleak.h | 4 ++
mm/kmemleak.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
2 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/kmemleak.h b/include/linux/kmemleak.h
index 99d9a67..10be9ef 100644
--- a/include/linux/kmemleak.h
+++ b/include/linux/kmemleak.h
@@ -35,6 +35,10 @@ extern void kmemleak_ignore(const void *ptr) __ref;
extern void kmemleak_scan_area(const void *ptr, size_t size, gfp_t gfp) __ref;
extern void kmemleak_no_scan(const void *ptr) __ref;
+extern int kmemleak_special_scan(const void *ptr, size_t size,
+ unsigned long (*fn)(unsigned long)) __ref;
+extern void kmemleak_no_special(const void *ptr) __ref;
+
static inline void kmemleak_alloc_recursive(const void *ptr, size_t size,
int min_count, unsigned long flags,
gfp_t gfp)
diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c
index 2c0d032..5166987 100644
--- a/mm/kmemleak.c
+++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
@@ -249,6 +249,67 @@ static struct early_log
early_log[CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK_EARLY_LOG_SIZE] __initdata;
static int crt_early_log __initdata;
+/* scan area which requires special conversion */
+struct special_block {
+ void *start;
+ void *end;
+ unsigned long (*fn)(unsigned long);
+};
+#define SPECIAL_MAX 5
+static struct special_block special_block[SPECIAL_MAX];
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(special_block_lock);
+
+int kmemleak_special_scan(const void *ptr, size_t size,
+ unsigned long (*fn)(unsigned long))
+{
+ struct special_block *p;
+ int i, err = 0;
+
+ if (!ptr || (size == 0) || !fn)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ spin_lock(&special_block_lock);
+
+ p = special_block;
+ for (i = 0; i < SPECIAL_MAX; i++, p++) {
+ if (!p->start)
+ break;
+ }
+
+ if (i == SPECIAL_MAX) {
+ err = -ENOMEM;
+ goto out;
+ }
+ p->start = (void *)ptr;
+ p->end = (void *)ptr + size;
+ p->fn = fn;
+out:
+ spin_unlock(&special_block_lock);
+
+ return err;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kmemleak_special_scan);
+
+void kmemleak_no_special(const void *ptr)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ spin_lock(&special_block_lock);
+
+ for (i = 0; i < SPECIAL_MAX; i++) {
+ struct special_block *p;
+
+ p = &special_block[i];
+ if (p->start == ptr) {
+ memset(p, 0, sizeof(*p));
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock(&special_block_lock);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kmemleak_no_special);
+
static void kmemleak_disable(void);
/*
@@ -983,8 +1044,9 @@ static int scan_should_stop(void)
* Scan a memory block (exclusive range) for valid pointers and add those
* found to the gray list.
*/
-static void scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
- struct kmemleak_object *scanned, int allow_resched)
+static void __scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
+ struct kmemleak_object *scanned, int allow_resched,
+ unsigned long (*fn)(unsigned long))
{
unsigned long *ptr;
unsigned long *start = PTR_ALIGN(_start, BYTES_PER_POINTER);
@@ -1005,7 +1067,7 @@ static void scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
BYTES_PER_POINTER))
continue;
- pointer = *ptr;
+ pointer = fn ? fn(*ptr) : *ptr;
object = find_and_get_object(pointer, 1);
if (!object)
@@ -1048,6 +1110,12 @@ static void scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
}
}
+static inline void scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
+ struct kmemleak_object *scanned, int allow_resched)
+{
+ __scan_block(_start, _end, scanned, allow_resched, NULL);
+}
+
/*
* Scan a memory block corresponding to a kmemleak_object. A condition is
* that object->use_count >= 1.
@@ -1134,6 +1202,7 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
unsigned long flags;
struct kmemleak_object *object;
int i;
+ struct special_block *p;
int new_leaks = 0;
jiffies_last_scan = jiffies;
@@ -1166,6 +1235,14 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
scan_block(_sdata, _edata, NULL, 1);
scan_block(__bss_start, __bss_stop, NULL, 1);
+ /* Scan area which requires special conversion of address */
+ p = special_block;
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(special_block); i++, p++) {
+ if (!p->start)
+ continue;
+ __scan_block(p->start, p->end, NULL, 1, p->fn);
+ }
+
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
/* per-cpu sections scanning */
for_each_possible_cpu(i)
--
1.7.1.rc1
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists