linux-kernel - Re: blk-mq crash under KVM in multiqueue block code (with virtio-blk and ext4)

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: <54199923.9010201@kernel.dk>
Date:	Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:22:27 -0600
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Virtualization List <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org >> Linux Kernel Mailing List" 
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: blk-mq crash under KVM in multiqueue block code (with virtio-blk
 and ext4)

On 2014-09-17 07:52, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 14:00:34 +0200
> David Hildenbrand <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Does anyone have an idea?
>>>>>> The request itself is completely filled with cc
>>>>>
>>>>> That is very weird, the 'rq' is got from hctx->tags,  and rq should be
>>>>> valid, and rq->q shouldn't have been changed even though it was
>>>>> double free or double allocation.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am currently asking myself if blk_mq_map_request should protect against softirq here but I cant say for sure,as I have never looked into that code before.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it needn't the protection.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> Digging through the code, I think I found a possible cause:
>>
>> tags->rqs[..] is not initialized with zeroes (via alloc_pages_node in
>> blk-mq.c:blk_mq_init_rq_map()).
>
> Yes, it may cause problem when the request is allocated at the 1st time,
> and timeout handler may comes just after the allocation and before its
> initialization, then oops triggered because of garbage data in the request.
>
> --
>  From ffd0824b7b686074c2d5d70bc4e6bba3ba56a30c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:00:34 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] blk-mq: initialize request before the 1st allocation
>
> Otherwise the request can be accessed from timeout handler
> just after its 1st allocation from tag pool and before
> initialization in blk_mq_rq_ctx_init(), so cause oops since
> the request is filled up with garbage data.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> ---
>   block/blk-mq.c |   10 ++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 4aac826..d24673f 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -514,6 +514,10 @@ struct request *blk_mq_tag_to_rq(struct blk_mq_tags *tags, unsigned int tag)
>   {
>   	struct request *rq = tags->rqs[tag];
>
> +	/* uninitialized request */
> +	if (!rq->q || rq->tag == -1)
> +		return rq;
> +
>   	if (!is_flush_request(rq, tag))
>   		return rq;
>
> @@ -1401,6 +1405,12 @@ static struct blk_mq_tags *blk_mq_init_rq_map(struct blk_mq_tag_set *set,
>   		left -= to_do * rq_size;
>   		for (j = 0; j < to_do; j++) {
>   			tags->rqs[i] = p;
> +
> +			/* Avoiding early access from timeout handler */
> +			tags->rqs[i]->tag = -1;
> +			tags->rqs[i]->q = NULL;
> +			tags->rqs[i]->cmd_flags = 0;
> +
>   			if (set->ops->init_request) {
>   				if (set->ops->init_request(set->driver_data,
>   						tags->rqs[i], hctx_idx, i,

Another way would be to ensure that the timeout handler doesn't touch 
hw_ctx or tag_sets that aren't fully initialized yet. But I think this 
is safer/cleaner.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/