linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] mm: introduce put_user

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]

Message-ID: <20181011084929.GB8418@quack2.suse.cz>
Date:   Thu, 11 Oct 2018 10:49:29 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, john.hubbard@...il.com,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder
 versions

On Wed 10-10-18 16:45:41, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 17:42:09 -0700 John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Also, maintainability.  What happens if someone now uses put_page() by
> > > mistake?  Kernel fails in some mysterious fashion?  How can we prevent
> > > this from occurring as code evolves?  Is there a cheap way of detecting
> > > this bug at runtime?
> > > 
> > 
> > It might be possible to do a few run-time checks, such as "does page that came 
> > back to put_user_page() have the correct flags?", but it's harder (without 
> > having a dedicated page flag) to detect the other direction: "did someone page 
> > in a get_user_pages page, to put_page?"
> > 
> > As Jan said in his reply, converting get_user_pages (and put_user_page) to 
> > work with a new data type that wraps struct pages, would solve it, but that's
> > an awfully large change. Still...given how much of a mess this can turn into 
> > if it's wrong, I wonder if it's worth it--maybe? 
> 
> This is a real worry.  If someone uses a mistaken put_page() then how
> will that bug manifest at runtime?  Under what set of circumstances
> will the kernel trigger the bug?

At runtime such bug will manifest as a page that can never be evicted from
memory. We could warn in put_page() if page reference count drops below
bare minimum for given user pin count which would be able to catch some
issues but it won't be 100% reliable. So at this point I'm more leaning
towards making get_user_pages() return a different type than just
struct page * to make it much harder for refcount to go wrong...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR