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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:07:44 +0000
From:   "Wiebe, Wladislav (Nokia - DE/Ulm)" <wladislav.wiebe@...ia.com>
To:     "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "chris.brandt@...esas.com" <chris.brandt@...esas.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: module: suppress misleading allocation failure warning

in case __vmalloc_node_range fails to allocate memory inside
of MODULES_VADDR <-> MODULES_END range, it suggests
to increase vmalloc size, like reported below:
..
[   41.526591] vmap allocation for size 65536 failed: use vmalloc=<size> to increase size.
[   41.526597] vmalloc: allocation failure: 58712 bytes
[   41.526602] systemd-udevd: page allocation failure: order:0, mode:0xd0
[   41.526610] CPU: 2 PID: 2782 Comm: systemd-udevd Tainted: G           O xxx #1
[   41.526628] [<c0413615>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c04106d9>] (show_stack+0x11/0x14)
[   41.526640] [<c04106d9>] (show_stack) from [<c0765745>] (dump_stack+0x7f/0xa2)
[   41.526651] [<c0765745>] (dump_stack) from [<c049fcb1>] (warn_alloc_failed+0x85/0xbc)
[   41.526664] [<c049fcb1>] (warn_alloc_failed) from [<c04c1f49>] (__vmalloc_node_range+0xed/0x188)
[   41.526673] [<c04c1f49>] (__vmalloc_node_range) from [<c0410ea7>] (module_alloc+0x47/0x8c)
[   41.526684] [<c0410ea7>] (module_alloc) from [<c046755b>] (module_alloc_update_bounds+0xf/0x64)
[   41.526692] [<c046755b>] (module_alloc_update_bounds) from [<c0467fd7>] (load_module+0xa27/0x19b4)
[   41.526700] [<c0467fd7>] (load_module) from [<c0469089>] (SyS_finit_module+0x59/0x84)
[   41.526709] [<c0469089>] (SyS_finit_module) from [<c040d8c1>] (ret_fast_syscall+0x1/0x64)
..

This is obviously wrong, as increasing vmalloc size will not
help in this case. We should suppress the warning and keep
it only reporting in PLT case, where it afterwards really tries to
allocate module memory in the VMALLOC space.

Signed-off-by: Wladislav Wiebe <wladislav.wiebe@...ia.com>
Tested-by: Wladislav Wiebe <wladislav.wiebe@...ia.com>
---
There might a more advanced solution possible, like to pass
an additional flag to the allocator for indicating that there
is a call from module_alloc and handle the allocation failure message
differently. But I am not sure if such a solution would
be to oversized for this purpose, as modprobe should fail in
case allocation fails for the module.

 arch/arm/kernel/module.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
index 4f14b5c..724447b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
@@ -41,8 +41,8 @@
 void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
 {
 	void *p = __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
-				GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, 0, NUMA_NO_NODE,
-				__builtin_return_address(0));
+				GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, 0,
+				NUMA_NO_NODE, __builtin_return_address(0));
 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_MODULE_PLTS) || p)
 		return p;
 	return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1,  VMALLOC_START, VMALLOC_END,
-- 
1.7.12.4

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ