linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] memory-hotplug: add memory_block

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: <50653DE7.70702@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:04:23 +0800
From:	Ni zhan Chen <nizhan.chen@...il.com>
To:	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
CC:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	wency@...fujitsu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
	liuj97@...il.com, len.brown@...el.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	paulus@...ba.org, minchan.kim@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] memory-hotplug: add memory_block_release

On 09/28/2012 11:45 AM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> Hi Kosaki-san,
>
> 2012/09/28 10:35, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>> <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Chen,
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/09/27 19:20, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Congyang,
>>>>
>>>> 2012/9/27 <wency@...fujitsu.com>
>>>>
>>>>> From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> When calling remove_memory_block(), the function shows following 
>>>>> message
>>>>> at
>>>>> device_release().
>>>>>
>>>>> Device 'memory528' does not have a release() function, it is 
>>>>> broken and
>>>>> must
>>>>> be fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What's the difference between the patch and original implemetation?
>>>
>>>
>>> The implementation is for removing a memory_block. So the purpose is
>>> same as original one. But original code is bad manner. 
>>> kobject_cleanup()
>>> is called by remove_memory_block() at last. But release function for
>>> releasing memory_block is not registered. As a result, the kernel 
>>> message
>>> is shown. IMHO, memory_block should be release by the releae function.
>>
>> but your patch introduced use after free bug, if i understand correctly.
>> See unregister_memory() function. After your patch, kobject_put() call
>> release_memory_block() and kfree(). and then device_unregister() will
>> touch freed memory.
>

this patch is similiar to [RFC v9 PATCH 10/21] memory-hotplug: add 
memory_block_release, they handle the same issue, can these two patches 
be fold to one?

> It is not correct. The kobject_put() is prepared against 
> find_memory_block()
> in remove_memory_block() since kobject->kref is incremented in it.
> So release_memory_block() is called by device_unregister() correctly 
> as follows:
>
> [ 1014.589008] Pid: 126, comm: kworker/0:2 Not tainted 
> 3.6.0-rc3-enable-memory-hotremove-and-root-bridge #3
> [ 1014.702437] Call Trace:
> [ 1014.731684]  [<ffffffff8144d096>] release_memory_block+0x16/0x30
> [ 1014.803581]  [<ffffffff81438587>] device_release+0x27/0xa0
> [ 1014.869312]  [<ffffffff8133e962>] kobject_cleanup+0x82/0x1b0
> [ 1014.937062]  [<ffffffff8133ea9d>] kobject_release+0xd/0x10
> [ 1015.002718]  [<ffffffff8133e7ec>] kobject_put+0x2c/0x60
> [ 1015.065271]  [<ffffffff81438107>] put_device+0x17/0x20
> [ 1015.126794]  [<ffffffff8143918a>] device_unregister+0x2a/0x60
> [ 1015.195578]  [<ffffffff8144d55b>] remove_memory_block+0xbb/0xf0
> [ 1015.266434]  [<ffffffff8144d5af>] unregister_memory_section+0x1f/0x30
> [ 1015.343532]  [<ffffffff811c0a58>] __remove_section+0x68/0x110
> [ 1015.412318]  [<ffffffff811c0be7>] __remove_pages+0xe7/0x120
> [ 1015.479021]  [<ffffffff81653d8c>] arch_remove_memory+0x2c/0x80
> [ 1015.548845]  [<ffffffff8165497b>] remove_memory+0x6b/0xd0
> [ 1015.613474]  [<ffffffff813d946c>] 
> acpi_memory_device_remove_memory+0x48/0x73
> [ 1015.697834]  [<ffffffff813d94c2>] acpi_memory_device_remove+0x2b/0x44
> [ 1015.774922]  [<ffffffff813a61e4>] acpi_device_remove+0x90/0xb2
> [ 1015.844796]  [<ffffffff8143c2fc>] __device_release_driver+0x7c/0xf0
> [ 1015.919814]  [<ffffffff8143c47f>] device_release_driver+0x2f/0x50
> [ 1015.992753]  [<ffffffff813a70dc>] acpi_bus_remove+0x32/0x6d
> [ 1016.059462]  [<ffffffff813a71a8>] acpi_bus_trim+0x91/0x102
> [ 1016.125128]  [<ffffffff813a72a1>] 
> acpi_bus_hot_remove_device+0x88/0x16b
> [ 1016.204295]  [<ffffffff813a2e57>] acpi_os_execute_deferred+0x27/0x34
> [ 1016.280350]  [<ffffffff81090599>] process_one_work+0x219/0x680
> [ 1016.350173]  [<ffffffff81090538>] ? process_one_work+0x1b8/0x680
> [ 1016.422072]  [<ffffffff813a2e30>] ? 
> acpi_os_wait_events_complete+0x23/0x23
> [ 1016.504357]  [<ffffffff810923ce>] worker_thread+0x12e/0x320
> [ 1016.571064]  [<ffffffff810922a0>] ? manage_workers+0x110/0x110
> [ 1016.640886]  [<ffffffff810983a6>] kthread+0xc6/0xd0
> [ 1016.699290]  [<ffffffff8167b144>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
> [ 1016.770149]  [<ffffffff81670bb0>] ? retint_restore_args+0x13/0x13
> [ 1016.843165]  [<ffffffff810982e0>] ? __init_kthread_worker+0x70/0x70
> [ 1016.918200]  [<ffffffff8167b140>] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13
>
> Thanks,
> Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>>
>> static void
>> unregister_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
>> {
>>     BUG_ON(memory->dev.bus != &memory_subsys);
>>
>>     /* drop the ref. we got in remove_memory_block() */
>>     kobject_put(&memory->dev.kobj);
>>     device_unregister(&memory->dev);
>> }
>>
>
>
>

--
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/