| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1906260908170.22069@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 10:22:45 +0200 (CEST)
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Johannes Erdfelt <johannes@...felt.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, mhiramat@...nel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] module: Fix livepatch/ftrace module text permissions
race
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 20:07:22 -0500
> Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > It's possible for livepatch and ftrace to be toggling a module's text
> > permissions at the same time, resulting in the following panic:
> >
>
> [..]
>
> > The above panic occurs when loading two modules at the same time with
> > ftrace enabled, where at least one of the modules is a livepatch module:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > klp_enable_patch()
> > klp_init_object_loaded()
> > module_disable_ro()
> > ftrace_module_enable()
> > ftrace_arch_code_modify_post_process()
> > set_all_modules_text_ro()
> > klp_write_object_relocations()
> > apply_relocate_add()
> > *patches read-only code* - BOOM
> >
> > A similar race exists when toggling ftrace while loading a livepatch
> > module.
> >
> > Fix it by ensuring that the livepatch and ftrace code patching
> > operations -- and their respective permissions changes -- are protected
> > by the text_mutex.
> >
> > Reported-by: Johannes Erdfelt <johannes@...felt.com>
> > Fixes: 444d13ff10fb ("modules: add ro_after_init support")
> > Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
> > Acked-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
>
> This patch looks uncontroversial. I'm going to pull this one in and
> start testing it. And if it works, I'll push to Linus.
Triggered this on s390x. Masami CCed and Linus as well, because the patch
is in master branch and we are after -rc6. Thomas CCed because of commit
2d1e38f56622 ("kprobes: Cure hotplug lock ordering issues").
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.2.0-rc6 #1 Tainted: G O K
------------------------------------------------------
insmod/1393 is trying to acquire lock:
000000002fdee887 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}, at: stop_machine+0x2e/0x60
but task is already holding lock:
000000005b22fb82 (text_mutex){+.+.}, at: ftrace_run_update_code+0x2a/0xa0
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (text_mutex){+.+.}:
validate_chain.isra.21+0xb32/0xd70
__lock_acquire+0x4b8/0x928
lock_acquire+0x102/0x230
__mutex_lock+0x88/0x908
mutex_lock_nested+0x32/0x40
register_kprobe+0x254/0x658
init_kprobes+0x11a/0x168
do_one_initcall+0x70/0x318
kernel_init_freeable+0x456/0x508
kernel_init+0x22/0x150
ret_from_fork+0x30/0x34
kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc
-> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
check_prev_add+0x90c/0xde0
validate_chain.isra.21+0xb32/0xd70
__lock_acquire+0x4b8/0x928
lock_acquire+0x102/0x230
cpus_read_lock+0x62/0xd0
stop_machine+0x2e/0x60
arch_ftrace_update_code+0x2e/0x40
ftrace_run_update_code+0x40/0xa0
ftrace_startup+0xb2/0x168
register_ftrace_function+0x64/0x88
klp_patch_object+0x1a2/0x290
klp_enable_patch+0x554/0x980
do_one_initcall+0x70/0x318
do_init_module+0x6e/0x250
load_module+0x1782/0x1990
__s390x_sys_finit_module+0xaa/0xf0
system_call+0xd8/0x2d0
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(text_mutex);
lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
lock(text_mutex);
lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
*** DEADLOCK ***
3 locks held by insmod/1393:
#0: 00000000a9723159 (klp_mutex){+.+.}, at: klp_enable_patch+0x62/0x980
#1: 00000000bd173ffc (ftrace_lock){+.+.}, at: register_ftrace_function+0x56/0x88
#2: 000000005b22fb82 (text_mutex){+.+.}, at: ftrace_run_update_code+0x2a/0xa0
stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 1393 Comm: insmod Tainted: G O K 5.2.0-rc6 #1
Hardware name: IBM 2827 H43 400 (KVM/Linux)
Call Trace:
([<00000000682100b4>] show_stack+0xb4/0x130)
[<0000000068adeb8c>] dump_stack+0x94/0xd8
[<00000000682b563c>] print_circular_bug+0x1f4/0x328
[<00000000682b7264>] check_prev_add+0x90c/0xde0
[<00000000682b826a>] validate_chain.isra.21+0xb32/0xd70
[<00000000682ba018>] __lock_acquire+0x4b8/0x928
[<00000000682ba952>] lock_acquire+0x102/0x230
[<0000000068243c12>] cpus_read_lock+0x62/0xd0
[<0000000068336bf6>] stop_machine+0x2e/0x60
[<0000000068355b3e>] arch_ftrace_update_code+0x2e/0x40
[<0000000068355b90>] ftrace_run_update_code+0x40/0xa0
[<000000006835971a>] ftrace_startup+0xb2/0x168
[<0000000068359834>] register_ftrace_function+0x64/0x88
[<00000000682e8a9a>] klp_patch_object+0x1a2/0x290
[<00000000682e7d64>] klp_enable_patch+0x554/0x980
[<00000000681fcaa0>] do_one_initcall+0x70/0x318
[<000000006831449e>] do_init_module+0x6e/0x250
[<0000000068312b52>] load_module+0x1782/0x1990
[<0000000068313002>] __s390x_sys_finit_module+0xaa/0xf0
[<0000000068b03f30>] system_call+0xd8/0x2d0
INFO: lockdep is turned off.
If I am reading the code correctly, ftrace_run_update_code() takes
text_mutex now and then calls stop_machine(), which grabs
cpu_hotplug_lock for reading. do_optimize_kprobes() (see the comment
there) expects cpu_hotplug_lock to be held and takes text_mutex. Whoops.
Maybe there is a simple fix, but reverting the commit in this stage seems
warranted.
Miroslav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists