[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51c8afc1-263a-ed9a-855a-761e44a6f158@virtuozzo.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 15:06:53 +0300
From: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Aleksey Makarov <aleksey.makarov@...aro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [devkmsg_write] BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in
copyin+0xea/0x170
On 11/07/2017 12:39 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> FYI this happens in v4.14-rc8 -- it's not necessarily a new bug.
>
> [ 22.184920] Freeing unused kernel memory: 824K
> [ 22.199198] Freeing unused kernel memory: 1436K
> [ 22.228460] x86/mm: Checked W+X mappings: passed, no W+X pages found.
> [ 22.230474] rodata_test: all tests were successful
> [ 22.254830] ==================================================================
> [ 22.257125] BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in copyin+0xea/0x170
> [ 22.258648] Write of size 26 at addr ffff880013432540 by task init/1
> [ 22.260272]
It says that we write 26 bytes starting from ffff880013432540.
But according to the dump of shadow memory:
[ 22.297667] >ffff880013432500: fc fc fb fb fb fb fc fc 00 00 00 03 fc fc fb fb
[ 22.298581] ^
we have allocated 27 bytes at address stating from ffff880013432540.
So this looks like a false positive. I've seen reports like this before:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<5163c242-4bbe-7fec-ab58-9c360abf0afd@...tuozzo.com>
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<899f0c39-81b5-5d02-5ced-937884d22c89@...il.com>
This happens only on old gcc versions, in your case it's 4.6:
[ 0.000000] Linux version 4.14.0-rc8 (kbuild@...-wsx01) (gcc version 4.6.4 (Debian 4.6.4-7)) #14 SMP PREEMPT Tue Nov 7 06:50:21 CST 2017
Old GCC is misscompiling something in check_memory_region() which cause false-positive like this one.
I never bothered to dig it deeper, because I've never seen this with GCC versions (>= 4.9.2) that actually support KASAN.
It's almost pointless to use KASAN=y kernel built with old GCC. All memory accesses, except manually instrumented with kasan_check_[read|write](),
won't be checked.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists