linux-kernel - Re: unused swap offset / bad page map.

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]

Date:	Mon, 26 Aug 2013 18:28:33 -0400
From:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: unused swap offset / bad page map.

On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:45PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
 
 > > That said, google does find "swap_free: Unused swap offset entry"
 > > reports from over the years. Most of them seem to be single-bit
 > > errors, though (ie when the entry is 00000100 or similar I'm more
 > > inclined to blame a bit error
 > 
 > Yes, historically they have usually represented either single-bit
 > errors, or corruption of page tables by other kernel data.  The
 > swap subsystem discovers it, but it's rarely an error of swap.
 
Just to rule out bad hardware, I've seen this on two systems
(admittedly the exact same spec, but still..)

 > So I don't care for Dave's suggestion much earlier in this thread,
 > that swapoff should fail with -EINVAL if there has been a bad page
 > taint: that doesn't necessarily interfere with swapoff at all.
 > 
 > And besides, swapoff is killable: yes, if counts go wrong, it
 > can cycle around endlessly, but it checks for signal_pending()
 > each time around the loop.

It might be killable, but if I've done /sbin/reboot, and the
kernel dies in sys_swapoff because of the corruption, I won't
get a chance to kill it, because at that point the shutdown process
has killed my shell, sshd, and just about everything else.
It mieans a grumpy walk to the other side of the house to prod a
reset button.  So yeah, it might not be a mergable thing, but
at least while bisecting it's pretty much a must-have.

 > I just did a quick diff of 3.11-rc7/mm against 3.10, and here's
 > a line in mremap which worries me.  That set_pte_at() is operating
 > on anything that isn't pte_none(), so the pte_mksoft_dirty() looks
 > prone to corrupt a swap entry.
 > 
 > I've not tried matching up bits with Dave's reports, and just going
 > into a meeting now, but this patch looks worth a try: probably Cyrill
 > can improve it meanwhile to what he actually wants there (I'm
 > surprised anything special is needed for just moving a pte).
 > 
 > Hugh
 > 
 > --- 3.11-rc7/mm/mremap.c	2013-07-14 17:10:16.640003652 -0700
 > +++ linux/mm/mremap.c	2013-08-26 14:46:14.460027627 -0700
 > @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ static void move_ptes(struct vm_area_str
 >  			continue;
 >  		pte = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, old_addr, old_pte);
 >  		pte = move_pte(pte, new_vma->vm_page_prot, old_addr, new_addr);
 > -		set_pte_at(mm, new_addr, new_pte, pte_mksoft_dirty(pte));
 > +		set_pte_at(mm, new_addr, new_pte, pte);
 >  	}

I'll give this a shot once I'm done with the bisect.

	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/