[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180515094744.45267e97@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 09:47:44 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] vsprintf: Use hw RNG for ptr_key
On Tue, 15 May 2018 13:06:26 +1000
"Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc> wrote:
> Currently we must wait for enough entropy to become available before
> hashed pointers can be printed. We can remove this wait by using the
> hw RNG if available.
>
> Use hw RNG to get keying material.
>
> Suggested-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Tobin C. Harding <me@...in.cc>
> ---
> lib/vsprintf.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
> index b82f0c6c2aec..3697a19c2b25 100644
> --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> @@ -1657,9 +1657,8 @@ char *device_node_string(char *buf, char *end, struct device_node *dn,
> static bool have_filled_random_ptr_key __read_mostly;
> static siphash_key_t ptr_key __read_mostly;
>
> -static void fill_random_ptr_key(struct random_ready_callback *unused)
> +static void ptr_key_ready(void)
> {
> - get_random_bytes(&ptr_key, sizeof(ptr_key));
> /*
> * have_filled_random_ptr_key==true is dependent on get_random_bytes().
> * ptr_to_id() needs to see have_filled_random_ptr_key==true
Nothing to do with this patch, but I believe there's a missing memory
barrier in the code.
Right after this we have:
smp_mb();
WRITE_ONCE(have_filled_random_ptr_key, true);
Where the comment says that have_filled_random_ptr_key must be set
after ptr_key has been updated. But there's no memory barrier on the
read side. In fact, I think this could be a smp_wmb() instead of a
smp_mb(). The read side has:
if (unlikely(!have_filled_random_ptr_key))
return string(buf, end, "(ptrval)", spec);
/* Missing memory barrier smp_rmb() here. */
hashval = (unsigned long)siphash_1u64((u64)ptr, &ptr_key);
Thus we can have something like:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
load ptr_key = 0
store ptr_key = random
smp_mb()
store have_filled_random_ptr_key
load have_filled_random_ptr_key = true
BAD BAD BAD!
I'll send a patch.
> @@ -1669,14 +1668,28 @@ static void fill_random_ptr_key(struct random_ready_callback *unused)
> WRITE_ONCE(have_filled_random_ptr_key, true);
> }
>
> +static void fill_random_ptr_key(struct random_ready_callback *unused)
> +{
> + get_random_bytes(&ptr_key, sizeof(ptr_key));
> + ptr_key_ready();
> +}
> +
> static struct random_ready_callback random_ready = {
> .func = fill_random_ptr_key
> };
>
> static int __init initialize_ptr_random(void)
> {
> - int ret = add_random_ready_callback(&random_ready);
> + int ret;
> + int key_size = sizeof(ptr_key);
> +
> + /* Use hw RNG if available */
> + if (get_random_bytes_arch(&ptr_key, key_size) == key_size) {
> + ptr_key_ready();
> + return 0;
> + }
>
> + ret = add_random_ready_callback(&random_ready);
> if (!ret) {
> return 0;
> } else if (ret == -EALREADY) {
But this patch looks good.
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists