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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 2 Nov 2016 13:25:57 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     x86@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@...cade.com>,
        "M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@...box.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH] perf/x86/intel/rapl: avoid access unallocate memory

After the hotplug rework Charles Williams reported that his vmware
virtualized system no longer boots and crashes in rapl_cpu_online().
As it turns out topology_max_packages() reports four while
topology_logical_package_id() for CPU two and three returns 65535. That
means cpu_to_rapl_pmu() for those CPUs is accessing not allocated memory
of rapl_pmus->pmus[].
"M. Vefa Bicakci" reported the same problem on XEN.
This patch ensures we error out in such an invalid situation.

Reported-by: "Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@...cade.com>
Tested-by: "M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@...box.com>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
---
I am not sure if this a race with the new hotplug code or something that was
always there. Both (M. Vefa Bicakc and Charles) say that the box boots
sometimes fine (without the patch).  smp_store_boot_cpu_info() should have run
before the notofoert and thus should have set the info properly. However I got
the following bootlog from Charles with this patch:

[    0.017110] smpboot: APIC(0) Converting physical 0 to logical package 0
[    0.017111] smpboot: APIC(1) Converting physical 1 to logical package 1
[    0.017113] smpboot: Max logical packages: 2                                                                                            
…
[    1.995494] RAPL PMU: rapl pmu error: max package: 2 but CPU1 belongs to 65535
[    1.995647] rapl pmu error: max package: 2 but CPU1 belongs to 65535
 
So it seems that the information got overwritten. I am not sure how to proceed
here. That memory corruption should be found and fixed and a boot crash might
motivate one to do so… I can't reproduce this on barematal.

Thread starts at
  d40f8e3c-b332-c331-38b9-11eb4f4aaaa7@...cade.com

 arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c
index 0a535cea8ff3..f5d85f2853d7 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c
@@ -682,6 +682,15 @@ static int __init init_rapl_pmus(void)
 {
 	int maxpkg = topology_max_packages();
 	size_t size;
+	unsigned int cpu;
+
+	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
+		if (topology_logical_package_id(cpu) >= maxpkg) {
+			pr_err("rapl pmu error: max package: %u but CPU%d belongs to %u\n",
+			       maxpkg, cpu, topology_logical_package_id(cpu));
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+	}
 
 	size = sizeof(*rapl_pmus) + maxpkg * sizeof(struct rapl_pmu *);
 	rapl_pmus = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
-- 
2.10.2

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ