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  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]
Date:   Mon, 12 Dec 2016 11:29:32 +1100
From:   NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
To:     Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH resend] block_dev: don't test bdev->bd_contains when it is not stable.


bdev->bd_contains is not stable before calling __blkdev_get().
When __blkdev_get() is called on a parition with ->bd_openers == 0
it sets
  bdev->bd_contains = bdev;
which is not correct for a partition.
After a call to __blkdev_get() succeeds, ->bd_openers will be > 0
and then ->bd_contains is stable.

When FMODE_EXCL is used, blkdev_get() calls
   bd_start_claiming() ->  bd_prepare_to_claim() -> bd_may_claim()

This call happens before __blkdev_get() is called, so ->bd_contains
is not stable.  So bd_may_claim() cannot safely use ->bd_contains.
It currently tries to use it, and this can lead to a BUG_ON().

This happens when a whole device is open with a bd_holder (in use by
dm in my particular example) and two threads race to open a partition
for the first time, one opening with O_EXCL and one without.

The thread that doesn't use O_EXCL gets through blkdev_get() to
__blkdev_get(), gains the ->bd_mutex, and sets bdev->bd_contains = bdev;

Immediately thereafter the other thread, using FMODE_EXCL, calls
bd_start_claiming from blkdev_get().  This should fail because the
whole device has a holder, but because bdev->bd_contains == bdev
bd_may_claim() incorrectly reports success.

This thread continues and blocks on bd_mutex.
The first thread then sets bdev->bd_contains correctly and drops the mutex.
The thread using FMODE_EXCL then continues and when it calls bd_may_claim()
again in:
			BUG_ON(!bd_may_claim(bdev, whole, holder));
The BUG_ON fires.

Fix this by removing the dependency on ->bd_contains in
bd_may_claim().  As bd_may_claim() have direct access to the whole
device, it can simply test if the target bdev is the whole device.

Fixes: 6b4517a7913a ("block: implement bd_claiming and claiming block")
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org (v2.6.35+)
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
---


No reply after 2 weeks, and this didn't appear in -next, so I'm adding a
couple more addresses - hopefully someone can take it.
Thanks,
NeilBrown


 fs/block_dev.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/block_dev.c b/fs/block_dev.c
index 05b553368bb4..9166b9f63d33 100644
--- a/fs/block_dev.c
+++ b/fs/block_dev.c
@@ -832,7 +832,7 @@ static bool bd_may_claim(struct block_device *bdev, struct block_device *whole,
 		return true;	 /* already a holder */
 	else if (bdev->bd_holder != NULL)
 		return false; 	 /* held by someone else */
-	else if (bdev->bd_contains == bdev)
+	else if (whole == bdev)
 		return true;  	 /* is a whole device which isn't held */
 
 	else if (whole->bd_holder == bd_may_claim)
-- 
2.11.0


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (833 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists