linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] memory_hotplug: Add a bounds check to check_hotplug_memory

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: <f2cde731-30a8-04ca-0ec6-f654d48db7bc@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:45:47 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Alastair D'Silva <alastair@....ibm.com>, alastair@...ilva.org
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
        Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Qian Cai <cai@....pw>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] memory_hotplug: Add a bounds check to
 check_hotplug_memory_range()

On 10.09.19 04:52, Alastair D'Silva wrote:
> From: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@...ilva.org>
> 
> On PowerPC, the address ranges allocated to OpenCAPI LPC memory
> are allocated from firmware. These address ranges may be higher
> than what older kernels permit, as we increased the maximum
> permissable address in commit 4ffe713b7587
> ("powerpc/mm: Increase the max addressable memory to 2PB"). It is
> possible that the addressable range may change again in the
> future.
> 
> In this scenario, we end up with a bogus section returned from
> __section_nr (see the discussion on the thread "mm: Trigger bug on
> if a section is not found in __section_nr").
> 
> Adding a check here means that we fail early and have an
> opportunity to handle the error gracefully, rather than rumbling
> on and potentially accessing an incorrect section.
> 
> Further discussion is also on the thread ("powerpc: Perform a bounds
> check in arch_add_memory").
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@...ilva.org>
> ---
>  include/linux/memory_hotplug.h |  1 +
>  mm/memory_hotplug.c            | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h b/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
> index f46ea71b4ffd..bc477e98a310 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
> @@ -110,6 +110,7 @@ extern void __online_page_increment_counters(struct page *page);
>  extern void __online_page_free(struct page *page);
>  
>  extern int try_online_node(int nid);
> +int check_hotplug_memory_addressable(u64 start, u64 size);
>  
>  extern int arch_add_memory(int nid, u64 start, u64 size,
>  			struct mhp_restrictions *restrictions);
> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> index c73f09913165..3c5428b014f9 100644
> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> @@ -1030,6 +1030,23 @@ int try_online_node(int nid)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +#ifndef MAX_POSSIBLE_PHYSMEM_BITS
> +#ifdef MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS
> +#define MAX_POSSIBLE_PHYSMEM_BITS MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS
> +#endif
> +#endif
> +

I think using MAX_POSSIBLE_PHYSMEM_BITS bits is wrong. You should use
MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS.

E.g. on x86_64, MAX_POSSIBLE_PHYSMEM_BITS is 52, while MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS
is (pgtable_l5_enabled() ? 52 : 46) - so MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS depends on the
actual HW.

> +int check_hotplug_memory_addressable(u64 start, u64 size)
> +{
> +#ifdef MAX_POSSIBLE_PHYSMEM_BITS
> +	if ((start + size - 1) >> MAX_POSSIBLE_PHYSMEM_BITS)
> +		return -E2BIG;
> +#endif
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(check_hotplug_memory_addressable);
> +
>  static int check_hotplug_memory_range(u64 start, u64 size)
>  {
>  	/* memory range must be block size aligned */
> @@ -1040,7 +1057,7 @@ static int check_hotplug_memory_range(u64 start, u64 size)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> -	return 0;
> +	return check_hotplug_memory_addressable(start, size);
>  }
>  
>  static int online_memory_block(struct memory_block *mem, void *arg)
> 


-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb