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  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, 8 Aug 2018 16:14:45 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard.Earnshaw@....com>
Cc:     Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
        Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
        libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matt Sealey <neko@...uhatsu.net>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: framebuffer corruption due to overlapping stp instructions on
 arm64

On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 04:01:12PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 08/08/18 15:12, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Aug 2018, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 01:09:02PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >>> 	while (1) {
> >>> 		start = (unsigned)random() % (LEN + 1);
> >>> 		end = (unsigned)random() % (LEN + 1);
> >>> 		if (start > end)
> >>> 			continue;
> >>> 		for (i = start; i < end; i++)
> >>> 			data[i] = val++;
> >>> 		memcpy(map + start, data + start, end - start);
> >>> 		if (memcmp(map, data, LEN)) {
> >>
> >> It may be worth trying to do a memcmp(map+start, data+start, end-start)
> >> here to see whether the hazard logic fails when the writes are unaligned
> >> but the reads are not.
> >>
> >> This problem may as well appear if you do byte writes and read longs
> >> back (and I consider this a hardware problem on this specific board).
> > 
> > I triad to insert usleep(10000) between the memcpy and memcmp, but the 
> > same corruption occurs. So, it can't be read-after-write hazard. It is 
> > caused by the improper handling of hazard between the overlapping writes 
> > inside memcpy.
> 
> I don't think you've told us what form the corruption takes.  Does it
> lose some bytes?  Modify values beyond the copy range?  Write completely
> arbitrary values?

>From this message:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/alpine.LRH.2.02.1808060553130.30832@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com/

- failing to write a few bytes
- writing a few bytes that were written 16 bytes before
- writing a few bytes that were written 16 bytes after

> The overlapping writes in memcpy never write different values to the
> same location, so I still feel this must be some sort of HW issue, not a
> SW one.

So do I (my interpretation is that it combines or rather skips some of
the writes to the same 16-byte address as it ignores the data strobes).

-- 
Catalin

Powered by blists - more mailing lists