linux-kernel - Re: Kernel 3.1.0-rc4 oops when connecting iPod

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: <20110907175952.GC23829@thinkpad-t410>
Date:	Wed, 7 Sep 2011 10:59:52 -0700
From:	Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>
To:	Pavel Ivanov <paivanof@...il.com>
Cc:	Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@...oo.co.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...era.com>
Subject: Re: Kernel 3.1.0-rc4 oops when connecting iPod

On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 12:35:22AM -0400, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@...oo.co.uk> wrote:
> >> I've looked into the code myself a little and here's what I
> >> see.
> >> hfsplus_read_wrapper() calls to hfsplus_submit_bio() twice
> >> to fill
> >> sbi->s_vhdr and sbi->s_backup_vhdr. And according to
> >> parameters they
> >> are filled with pointers into sbi->s_vhdr_buf and
> >> sbi->s_backup_vhdr_buf respectively. It's done with the
> >> following code
> >> at fs/hfsplus/wrapper.c:79:
> >>
> >>     if (!(rw & WRITE) && data)
> >>         *data = (u8 *)buf +
> >> offset;
> >>
> >> So s_vhdr and s_backup_vhdr shouldn't be freed, s_vhdr_buf
> >> and
> >> s_backup_vhdr_buf should be freed instead. And indeed
> >> changing in
> >> hfsplus_fill_super()
> >>
> >>     kfree(sbi->s_vhdr);
> >>     kfree(sbi->s_backup_vhdr);
> >>
> >> to
> >>
> >>     kfree(sbi->s_vhdr_buf);
> >>     kfree(sbi->s_backup_vhdr_buf);
> >>
> >> fixes BUG reports from SLUB.
> >
> > The code around there is a bit too dense, and both of the *_buf are recent introductions (and temp values, I think) as is hfsplus_submit_bio() itself, around the 2.6.39/3.0 time frame. I think the intention is to fill s_vhdr/s_backup_vhdr via mulitple fetches using *_buf as temp buffer.
> 
> Well, look at the commit 6596528e. It clearly shows that result of
> kmalloc() is no longer assigned to sbi->s_vhdr and sbi->s_backup_vhdr,
> but is assigned to sbi->s_vhdr_buf and sbi->s_backup_vhdr_buf. Also
> this commit clearly changes hfsplus_put_super() so that it doesn't
> free sbi->s_vhdr and sbi->s_backup_vhdr, but frees sbi->s_vhdr_buf and
> sbi->s_backup_vhdr_buf instead. I guess Seth just missed
> hfsplus_fill_super() in there as it's pretty unusual exit path.

Yes, that was definitely just an oversight. Has anyone provided a patch
yet? If not I've pasted a patch below. Seems like a fix should be
applied ASAP.


>From d27825b880028e9a45ba640d86c9e8101db0606b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 10:38:35 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] hfsplus: Fix kfree of wrong pointers in hfsplus_fill_super() error path

Commit 6596528 (hfsplus: ensure bio requests are not smaller than
the hardware sectors) changed the pointers used for volume header
allocations but failed to change the pointer freed in the error
path of hfsplus_fill_super(). This patch fixes the problem.

Reported-by: Pavel Ivanov <paivanof@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>
Cc: <stable@...nel.org>
---
 fs/hfsplus/super.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/hfsplus/super.c b/fs/hfsplus/super.c
index c106ca2..cadbb8c 100644
--- a/fs/hfsplus/super.c
+++ b/fs/hfsplus/super.c
@@ -525,8 +525,8 @@ out_close_cat_tree:
 out_close_ext_tree:
 	hfs_btree_close(sbi->ext_tree);
 out_free_vhdr:
-	kfree(sbi->s_vhdr);
-	kfree(sbi->s_backup_vhdr);
+	kfree(sbi->s_vhdr_buf);
+	kfree(sbi->s_backup_vhdr_buf);
 out_unload_nls:
 	unload_nls(sbi->nls);
 	unload_nls(nls);
-- 
1.7.4.1

--
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/