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: <20190429105939.11962-1-jslaby@suse.cz>
Date:   Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:59:39 +0200
From:   Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH] memcg: make it work on sparse non-0-node systems

We have a single node system with node 0 disabled:
  Scanning NUMA topology in Northbridge 24
  Number of physical nodes 2
  Skipping disabled node 0
  Node 1 MemBase 0000000000000000 Limit 00000000fbff0000
  NODE_DATA(1) allocated [mem 0xfbfda000-0xfbfeffff]

This causes crashes in memcg when system boots:
  BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000008
  #PF error: [normal kernel read fault]
...
  RIP: 0010:list_lru_add+0x94/0x170
...
  Call Trace:
   d_lru_add+0x44/0x50
   dput.part.34+0xfc/0x110
   __fput+0x108/0x230
   task_work_run+0x9f/0xc0
   exit_to_usermode_loop+0xf5/0x100

It is reproducible as far as 4.12. I did not try older kernels. You have
to have a new enough systemd, e.g. 241 (the reason is unknown -- was not
investigated). Cannot be reproduced with systemd 234.

The system crashes because the size of lru array is never updated in
memcg_update_all_list_lrus and the reads are past the zero-sized array,
causing dereferences of random memory.

The root cause are list_lru_memcg_aware checks in the list_lru code.
The test in list_lru_memcg_aware is broken: it assumes node 0 is always
present, but it is not true on some systems as can be seen above.

So fix this by checking the first online node instead of node 0.

Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>
Cc: <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Cc: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 mm/list_lru.c | 6 +-----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/list_lru.c b/mm/list_lru.c
index 0730bf8ff39f..7689910f1a91 100644
--- a/mm/list_lru.c
+++ b/mm/list_lru.c
@@ -37,11 +37,7 @@ static int lru_shrinker_id(struct list_lru *lru)
 
 static inline bool list_lru_memcg_aware(struct list_lru *lru)
 {
-	/*
-	 * This needs node 0 to be always present, even
-	 * in the systems supporting sparse numa ids.
-	 */
-	return !!lru->node[0].memcg_lrus;
+	return !!lru->node[first_online_node].memcg_lrus;
 }
 
 static inline struct list_lru_one *
-- 
2.21.0

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ