linux-kernel - Re: mm: NULL ptr deref in balance_dirty_pages

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: <20140226154534.GJ8264@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Feb 2014 07:45:34 -0800
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:	Bob Liu <lliubbo@...il.com>, Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: mm: NULL ptr deref in balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:20:51PM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:48:30PM +0800, Bob Liu wrote:
> > > Do you relay on unlock_page() to have a compiler barrier?
> > >
> > 
> > Before your commit mapping is a local variable and be assigned before
> > unlock_page():
> > struct address_space *mapping = page->mapping;
> > unlock_page(dirty_page);
> > put_page(dirty_page);
> > if ((dirtied || page_mkwrite) && mapping) {
> > 
> > 
> > I'm afraid now "fault_page->mapping" might be changed to NULL after
> > "if ((dirtied || vma->vm_ops->page_mkwrite) && fault_page->mapping) {"
> > and then passed down to balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited(NULL).
> 
> I see what you try to fix. I wounder if we need to do
> 
> mapping = ACCESS_ONCE(fault_page->mapping);
> 
> instead.
> 
> The question is if compiler on its own can eliminate intermediate variable
> and dereference fault_page->mapping twice, as code with my patch does.
> I ask because smp_mb__after_clear_bit() in unlock_page() does nothing on
> some architectures.

The compiler is most definitely within its rights to eliminate intermediate
variables if you don't use something like ACCESS_ONCE().  For more info,
see the LWN writeup:  http://lwn.net/Articles/508991/

							Thanx, Paul

> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> > >> index 548d97e..90cea22 100644
> > >> --- a/mm/memory.c
> > >> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> > >> @@ -3419,6 +3419,7 @@ static int do_shared_fault(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > >> struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > >>   pgoff_t pgoff, unsigned int flags, pte_t orig_pte)
> > >>  {
> > >>   struct page *fault_page;
> > >> + struct address_space *mapping;
> > >>   spinlock_t *ptl;
> > >>   pte_t *pte;
> > >>   int dirtied = 0;
> > >> @@ -3454,13 +3455,14 @@ static int do_shared_fault(struct mm_struct
> > >> *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > >>
> > >>   if (set_page_dirty(fault_page))
> > >>   dirtied = 1;
> > >> + mapping = fault_page->mapping;
> > >>   unlock_page(fault_page);
> > >> - if ((dirtied || vma->vm_ops->page_mkwrite) && fault_page->mapping) {
> > >> + if ((dirtied || vma->vm_ops->page_mkwrite) && mapping) {
> > >>   /*
> > >>   * Some device drivers do not set page.mapping but still
> > >>   * dirty their pages
> > >>   */
> > >> - balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited(fault_page->mapping);
> > >> + balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited(mapping);
> > >>   }
> > >>
> > >>   /* file_update_time outside page_lock */
> > >> --
> > >> 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/
> > >
> > > --
> > >  Kirill A. Shutemov
> > 
> > -- 
> > Regards,
> > --Bob
> 
> -- 
>  Kirill A. Shutemov
> 

--
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/