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:   Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:47:56 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        syzbot <syzbot+1a240cdb1f4cc88819df@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, mingo@...nel.org,
        rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
        vbabka@...e.cz, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: WARNING in kvmalloc_node



On 2018年02月14日 20:29, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:17:18 +0100
> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 02/14/2018 01:02 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> On 2018年02月14日 19:51, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Wed 14-02-18 19:47:30, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>> On 2018年02月14日 17:28, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>>>>>> [ +Jason, +Jesper ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 02/14/2018 09:43 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue 13-02-18 18:55:33, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 03:59:01PM -0800, syzbot wrote:
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>     kvmalloc include/linux/mm.h:541 [inline]
>>>>>>>>>     kvmalloc_array include/linux/mm.h:557 [inline]
>>>>>>>>>     __ptr_ring_init_queue_alloc include/linux/ptr_ring.h:474 [inline]
>>>>>>>>>     ptr_ring_init include/linux/ptr_ring.h:492 [inline]
>>>>>>>>>     __cpu_map_entry_alloc kernel/bpf/cpumap.c:359 [inline]
>>>>>>>>>     cpu_map_update_elem+0x3c3/0x8e0 kernel/bpf/cpumap.c:490
>>>>>>>>>     map_update_elem kernel/bpf/syscall.c:698 [inline]
>>>>>>>> Blame the BPF people, not the MM people ;-)
>>>>>> Heh, not really. ;-)
>>>>>>   
>>>>>>> Yes. kvmalloc (the vmalloc part) doesn't support GFP_ATOMIC semantic.
>>>>>> Agree, that doesn't work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bug was added in commit 0bf7800f1799 ("ptr_ring: try vmalloc() when kmalloc() fails").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jason, please take a look at fixing this, thanks!
>>>>> It looks to me the only solution is to revert that commit.
>>>> Do you really need this to be GFP_ATOMIC? I can see some callers are
>>>> under RCU read lock but can we perhaps do the allocation outside of this
>>>> section?
>>> If I understand the code correctly, the code would be called by XDP program (usually run inside a bh) which makes it hard to do this.
>>>
>>> Rethink of this, we can probably test gfp and not call kvmalloc if GFP_ATOMIC is set in __ptr_ring_init_queue_alloc().
>> That would be one option indeed (probably useful in any case to make the API
>> more robust). Another one is to just not use GFP_ATOMIC in cpumap. Looking at
>> it, update can neither be called out of a BPF prog since prevented by verifier
>> nor under RCU reader side when updating this type of map from syscall path.
>> Jesper, any concrete reason we still need GFP_ATOMIC here?
> Allocations in cpumap (related to ptr_ring) should only be possible to
> be initiated through userspace via bpf-syscall.

I see verifier guarantees this.

>   Thus, there isn't any
> reason for GFP_ATOMIC here.
>

Want me to send a patch to remove GFP_ATOMIC here?

Thanks

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ