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  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:   Thu, 9 Nov 2017 13:35:53 +0900
From:   Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jaewon Kim <jaewon31.kim@...sung.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        vbabka@...e.cz, minchan@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jaewon31.kim@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: page_ext: check if page_ext is not prepared

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 03:21:06PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 08-11-17 16:59:56, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 10:47:30AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [CC Joonsoo]
> > > 
> > > On Tue 07-11-17 18:41:31, Jaewon Kim wrote:
> > > > online_page_ext and page_ext_init allocate page_ext for each section, but
> > > > they do not allocate if the first PFN is !pfn_present(pfn) or
> > > > !pfn_valid(pfn). Then section->page_ext remains as NULL. lookup_page_ext
> > > > checks NULL only if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled. For a valid PFN,
> > > > __set_page_owner will try to get page_ext through lookup_page_ext.
> > > > Without CONFIG_DEBUG_VM lookup_page_ext will misuse NULL pointer as value
> > > > 0. This incurrs invalid address access.
> > > > 
> > > > This is the panic example when PFN 0x100000 is not valid but PFN 0x13FC00
> > > > is being used for page_ext. section->page_ext is NULL, get_entry returned
> > > > invalid page_ext address as 0x1DFA000 for a PFN 0x13FC00.
> > > > 
> > > > To avoid this panic, CONFIG_DEBUG_VM should be removed so that page_ext
> > > > will be checked at all times.
> > > > 
> > > > <1>[   11.618085] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 01dfa014
> > > > <1>[   11.618140] pgd = ffffffc0c6dc9000
> > > > <1>[   11.618174] [01dfa014] *pgd=0000000000000000, *pud=0000000000000000
> > > > <4>[   11.618240] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > > <2>[   11.618278] Kernel BUG at ffffff80082371e0 [verbose debug info unavailable]
> > > > <0>[   11.618338] Internal error: Oops: 96000045 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> > > > <4>[   11.618381] Modules linked in:
> > > > <4>[   11.618524] task: ffffffc0c6ec9180 task.stack: ffffffc0c6f40000
> > > > <4>[   11.618569] PC is at __set_page_owner+0x48/0x78
> > > > <4>[   11.618607] LR is at __set_page_owner+0x44/0x78
> > > > <4>[   11.626025] [<ffffff80082371e0>] __set_page_owner+0x48/0x78
> > > > <4>[   11.626071] [<ffffff80081df9f0>] get_page_from_freelist+0x880/0x8e8
> > > > <4>[   11.626118] [<ffffff80081e00a4>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x14c/0xc48
> > > > <4>[   11.626165] [<ffffff80081e610c>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0xdc/0x264
> > > > <4>[   11.626214] [<ffffff80081d8824>] filemap_fault+0x2ac/0x550
> > > > <4>[   11.626259] [<ffffff80082e5cf8>] ext4_filemap_fault+0x3c/0x58
> > > > <4>[   11.626305] [<ffffff800820a2f8>] __do_fault+0x80/0x120
> > > > <4>[   11.626347] [<ffffff800820eb4c>] handle_mm_fault+0x704/0xbb0
> > > > <4>[   11.626393] [<ffffff800809ba70>] do_page_fault+0x2e8/0x394
> > > > <4>[   11.626437] [<ffffff8008080be4>] do_mem_abort+0x88/0x124
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I suspec this goes all the way down to when page_ext has been
> > > resurrected.  It is quite interesting that nobody has noticed this in 3
> > > years but maybe the feature is not used all that much and the HW has to
> > > be quite special to trigger. Anyway the following should be added
> > > 
> > >  Fixes: eefa864b701d ("mm/page_ext: resurrect struct page extending code for debugging")
> > >  Cc: stable
> > 
> > IIRC, caller of lookup_page_ext() doesn't check 'NULL' until
> > f86e427197 ("mm: check the return value of lookup_page_ext for all
> > call sites"). So, this problem would happen old kernel even if this
> > patch is applied to old kernel.
> 
> OK, then the changelog should mention dependency on that check so that
> anybody who backports this patch to pre 4.7 kernels knows to pull that
> one as well.
> 
> > IMO, proper fix is to check all the pfn in the section. It is sent
> > from Jaewon in other mail.
> 
> I believe that this patch is valuable on its own and the other one
> should build on top of it.

Okay, agreed.

Thanks.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists