[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121008151552.GA10881@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 11:15:52 -0400
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
bhutchings@...arflare.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: mpol_to_str revisited.
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 11:09:49AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> Last month I sent in 80de7c3138ee9fd86a98696fd2cf7ad89b995d0a to remove
> a user triggerable BUG in mempolicy.
>
> Ben Hutchings pointed out to me that my change introduced a potential leak
> of stack contents to userspace, because none of the callers check the return value.
>
> This patch adds the missing return checking, and also clears the buffer beforehand.
>
> Reported-by: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
> Cc: stable@...nel.org
> Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
>
> ---
> unanswered question: why are the buffer sizes here different ? which is correct?
A further unanswered question is how the state got so screwed up that we hit that
default case at all. Looking at the original report: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/6/356
What's in RAX looks suspiciously like left-over slab poison.
If pol->mode was poisoned, that smells like we have a race where policy is getting freed
while another process is reading it.
Am I missing something, or is there no locking around that at all ?
Dave
--
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