linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] mm/mempolicy: Fix get

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]

Date:   Tue, 31 Oct 2017 09:34:54 +0100
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@...wei.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mhocko@...e.com, mingo@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
        n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com, salls@...ucsb.edu
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tanxiaojun@...wei.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] mm/mempolicy: Fix get_nodes() mask
 miscalculation

On 10/27/2017 12:14 PM, Yisheng Xie wrote:
> It appears there is a nodemask miscalculation in the get_nodes()
> function in mm/mempolicy.c.  This bug has two effects:
> 
> 1. It is impossible to specify a length 1 nodemask.
> 2. It is impossible to specify a nodemask containing the last node.

This should be more specific, which syscalls are you talking about?
I assume it's set_mempolicy() and mbind() and it's the same issue that
was discussed at https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=150732591909576&w=2 ?

> Brent have submmit a patch before v2.6.12, however, Andi revert his
> changed for ABI problem. I just resent this patch as RFC, for do not
> clear about what's the problem Andi have met.

You should have CC'd Andi. As was discussed in the other thread, this
would make existing programs potentially unsafe, so we can't change it.
Instead it should be documented.

> As manpage of set_mempolicy, If the value of maxnode is zero, the
> nodemask argument is ignored. but we should not ignore the nodemask
> when maxnode is 1.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@...wei.com>
> ---
>  mm/mempolicy.c | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index a2af6d5..613e9d0 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -1265,7 +1265,6 @@ static int get_nodes(nodemask_t *nodes, const unsigned long __user *nmask,
>  	unsigned long nlongs;
>  	unsigned long endmask;
>  
> -	--maxnode;
>  	nodes_clear(*nodes);
>  	if (maxnode == 0 || !nmask)
>  		return 0;
>