| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87k37o46hx.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 10:08:58 +0200
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michael Holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmap_vmcore: skip non-ram pages reported by hypervisors
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 17:05:49 +0200 Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> we have a special check in read_vmcore() handler to check if the page was
>> reported as ram or not by the hypervisor (pfn_is_ram()). However, when
>> vmcore is read with mmap() no such check is performed. That can lead to
>> unpredictable results, e.g. when running Xen PVHVM guest memcpy() after
>> mmap() on /proc/vmcore will hang processing HVMMEM_mmio_dm pages creating
>> enormous load in both DomU and Dom0.
>>
>> Fix the issue by mapping each non-ram page to the zero page. Keep direct
>> path with remap_oldmem_pfn_range() to avoid looping through all pages on
>> bare metal.
>>
>> The issue can also be solved by overriding remap_oldmem_pfn_range() in
>> xen-specific code, as remap_oldmem_pfn_range() was been designed for.
>> That, however, would involve non-obvious xen code path for all x86 builds
>> with CONFIG_XEN_PVHVM=y and would prevent all other hypervisor-specific
>> code on x86 arch from doing the same override.
>
> I'd like to get some reviewed-by's and tested-by's on this one please.
>
This patch can be tested with Xen PVHVM guest only as it is the only
platform which registers oldmem_pfn_is_ram atm.
>> --- a/fs/proc/vmcore.c
>> +++ b/fs/proc/vmcore.c
>> @@ -328,6 +328,46 @@ static inline char *alloc_elfnotes_buf(size_t notes_sz)
>> * virtually contiguous user-space in ELF layout.
>> */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>> +static u64 remap_oldmem_pfn_checked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, u64 len,
>> + unsigned long pfn, unsigned long page_count)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long pos;
>> + size_t size;
>> + unsigned long vma_addr;
>> + unsigned long emptypage_pfn = __pa(empty_zero_page) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>
> That's old-school. Can we use my_zero_pfn() here?
>
> Also, "zeropage_pfn" is a better name - let's not introduce the
> hitherto unknown concept of an "empty page".
>
Sure!
>> + for (pos = pfn; (pos - pfn) <= page_count; pos++) {
>> + if (!pfn_is_ram(pos) || (pos - pfn) == page_count) {
>> + /* we hit a page which is not ram or reached the end */
>> + if (pos - pfn > 0) {
>> + /* remapping continuous region */
>> + size = (pos - pfn) << PAGE_SHIFT;
>> + vma_addr = vma->vm_start + len;
>> + if (remap_oldmem_pfn_range(vma, vma_addr,
>> + pfn, size,
>> + vma->vm_page_prot))
>> + return len;
>> + len += size;
>> + page_count -= (pos - pfn);
>> + }
>> + if (page_count > 0) {
>> + /* we hit a page which is not ram, replacing
>> + with an empty one */
>
> I suggest
>
> /*
> * We hit a page which is not ram. Replace it
> * with the zero page.
> */
>
:-)
>> + vma_addr = vma->vm_start + len;
>> + if (remap_oldmem_pfn_range(vma, vma_addr,
>> + emptypage_pfn,
>> + PAGE_SIZE,
>> + vma->vm_page_prot))
>> + return len;
>> + len += PAGE_SIZE;
>> + pfn = pos + 1;
>> + page_count--;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return len;
>> +}
>
> Also, this loop seems unnecessarily hard to follow. It *look* like the
> `for' statement has an off-by-one because of the "<=", but page_count
> is mofidied inside the loop! Despite it being an incoming formal
> argument.
There is no off-by-one error here (I believe) as I'm checking two
possible conditions to remap the continuous region:
1) We hit a non-ram page
2) We reached the end
so we exclude the page pos is pointing us to in both cases.
I tried to avoid code duplication e.g. having one 'remap continuous
region' inside the loop to do the remapping when we hit a non-ram page
and having the other one outside the loop to remap the tail.
>
> None of this is made any easier by the function's lack of
> documentation. Some description of the incoming args would help, along
> with an overall description of the function's responsibilities.
>
> That being said, can't we just do something nice and simple like
>
> pos = pfn;
> while (pos < pfn + page_count) {
> stuff which advances `pos'
> }
>
> ?
>
I completely agree it's possible to make this code easier to
understand, will do.
>> static int mmap_vmcore(struct file *file, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>> {
>> size_t size = vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start;
>> @@ -383,17 +423,33 @@ static int mmap_vmcore(struct file *file, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>>
>> list_for_each_entry(m, &vmcore_list, list) {
>> if (start < m->offset + m->size) {
>> - u64 paddr = 0;
>> + u64 paddr = 0, original_len;
>> + unsigned long pfn, page_count;
>>
>> tsz = min_t(size_t, m->offset + m->size - start, size);
>> paddr = m->paddr + start - m->offset;
>> - if (remap_oldmem_pfn_range(vma, vma->vm_start + len,
>> - paddr >> PAGE_SHIFT, tsz,
>> - vma->vm_page_prot))
>> - goto fail;
>> +
>> + /* check if oldmem_pfn_is_ram was registered to avoid
>> + looping over all pages without a reason */
>
> Please lay out the comments in the usual fashion:
>
> /*
> * ...
> * ..
> */
>
> And sentences start whith upper-case letters!
>
>> + if (oldmem_pfn_is_ram) {
>> + pfn = paddr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>> + page_count = tsz >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>> + original_len = len;
>> + len = remap_oldmem_pfn_checked(vma, len, pfn,
>> + page_count);
>> + if (len != original_len + tsz)
>> + goto fail;
>> + } else {
>> + if (remap_oldmem_pfn_range(vma,
>> + vma->vm_start + len,
>> + paddr >> PAGE_SHIFT,
>> + tsz,
>> + vma->vm_page_prot))
>> + goto fail;
>> + len += tsz;
>> + }
>> size -= tsz;
>> start += tsz;
>> - len += tsz;
>>
>> if (size == 0)
>> return 0;
Thank you very much for your review! I'm working on v2.
--
Vitaly
--
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