linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.12 64/78] fs, seqfile: always allow oom killer

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <8bb06e0975c2587f5acd9f714c53130dd1fb5ca4.1461323133.git.jslaby@suse.cz>
Date:	Fri, 22 Apr 2016 13:05:47 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To:	stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: [PATCH 3.12 64/78] fs, seqfile: always allow oom killer

From: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>

3.12-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

===============

commit 0f930902eb8806cff8dcaef9ff9faf3cfa5fd748 upstream.

Since 5cec38ac866b ("fs, seq_file: fallback to vmalloc instead of oom kill
processes") seq_buf_alloc() avoids calling the oom killer for PAGE_SIZE or
smaller allocations; but larger allocations can use the oom killer via
vmalloc().  Thus reads of small files can return ENOMEM, but larger files
use the oom killer to avoid ENOMEM.

The effect of this bug is that reads from /proc and other virtual
filesystems can return ENOMEM instead of the preferred behavior - oom
killing something (possibly the calling process).  I don't know of anyone
except Google who has noticed the issue.

I suspect the fix is more needed in smaller systems where there isn't any
reclaimable memory.  But these seem like the kinds of systems which
probably don't use the oom killer for production situations.

Memory overcommit requires use of the oom killer to select a victim
regardless of file size.

Enable oom killer for small seq_buf_alloc() allocations.

Fixes: 5cec38ac866b ("fs, seq_file: fallback to vmalloc instead of oom kill processes")
Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
---
 fs/seq_file.c | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/seq_file.c b/fs/seq_file.c
index 96ae14abce98..a3e41be17e5e 100644
--- a/fs/seq_file.c
+++ b/fs/seq_file.c
@@ -35,12 +35,17 @@ static void seq_set_overflow(struct seq_file *m)
 static void *seq_buf_alloc(unsigned long size)
 {
 	void *buf;
+	gfp_t gfp = GFP_KERNEL;

 	/*
-	 * __GFP_NORETRY to avoid oom-killings with high-order allocations -
-	 * it's better to fall back to vmalloc() than to kill things.
+	 * For high order allocations, use __GFP_NORETRY to avoid oom-killing -
+	 * it's better to fall back to vmalloc() than to kill things.  For small
+	 * allocations, just use GFP_KERNEL which will oom kill, thus no need
+	 * for vmalloc fallback.
 	 */
-	buf = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOWARN);
+	if (size > PAGE_SIZE)
+		gfp |= __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOWARN;
+	buf = kmalloc(size, gfp);
 	if (!buf && size > PAGE_SIZE)
 		buf = vmalloc(size);
 	return buf;
-- 
2.8.1