linux-kernel - Re: scsi: address leak in the error path of discard page allocation

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]

Message-ID: <20100701210749.GB28546@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 1 Jul 2010 17:07:49 -0400
From:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
Cc:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>, axboe@...nel.dk,
	hch@....de, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: scsi: address leak in the error path of discard page allocation

On Thu, Jul 01 2010 at  4:19pm -0400,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 16:15 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 01 2010 at  9:03am -0400,
> > Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Jul 01 2010 at  6:49am -0400,
> > > FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > This fixes discard page leak by using q->unprep_rq_fn facility.
> > > > 
> > > > q->unprep_rq_fn is called when all the data buffer (req->bio and
> > > > scsi_data_buffer) in the request is freed.
> > > > 
> > > > sd_unprep() uses rq->buffer to free discard page allocated in
> > > > sd_prepare_discard().
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
> > > 
> > > Thanks for sorting this out Tomo, all 3 patches work great!
> > > 
> > > BTW, there is one remaining (rare) leak in the allocation path.
> > > 
> > > The following patch serves to fix it but I'm not sure if there is a more
> > > elegant way to address this.
> > 
> > I've continued to look at this to arrive at alternative implementation.
> > Here is a summary of the problem:
> > 
> > A 'scsi_setup_discard_cmnd' return other than BLKPREP_OK will not cause
> > a discard request to get completely stripped down ('blk_finish_request'
> > isn't calling 'blk_unprep_request' because REQ_DONTPREP is not set by
> > 'scsi_prep_return' for none BLKPREP_OK return).  Therefore the discard
> > request's page will _not_ get cleaned up.
> > 
> > Aside from code inspection, I confirmed this by adding some test code to
> > force a one-time initial BLKPREP_DEFER return from
> > 'scsi_setup_discard_cmnd'.
> > 
> > > An alternative would be to check if the page is already allocated
> > > (before allocating the page in scsi_setup_discard_cmnd)?
> > 
> > Unfortunatey this "alternative" won't work because it completely ignores
> > the case where BLKPREP_KILL is returned from scsi_setup_discard_cmnd'.
> >  
> > > Please advise, thanks.
> > 
> > In short, I'm not too happy that the following patch doesn't allow for
> > centralized cleanup of the discard request's page (via sd_unprep_fn).
> > But in order to do that we'd likely have to:
> > 1) relax blk_finish_request's REQ_DONTPREP constraint
> > 2) add other weird conditionals within blk_unprep_request because
> >    the discard request wasn't _really_ prepared?
> > 
> > So given this I'm inclined to stick with the following patch.
> > 
> > Jens and/or James, what do you think?
> 
> The rules are pretty clear:  Unprep is only called if the request gets
> prepped ... that means you have to return BLKPREP_OK.  Defer or kill
> assume there's no teardown to do, so the allocation (if it took place)
> must be reversed before returning them

OK, thanks for clarifying.  This confirms that the general approach I
took in this patch is correct.  It remains to be seen if Jens is
agreeable with blk_clear_request_payload.

I know Christoph thought my introduction and use of
blk_clear_request_payload was reasonable.  Christoph, please feel free
to add your Ack to this patch if you approve.

I look forward to feedback from Tomo and Jens now too.  Hopefully Jens
will pick this patch up.

regards,
Mike
--
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/