| 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: <bebe97e1-b1fe-7f36-91c0-7d412f093560@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 10:16:34 +0800
From: Jia He <hejianet@...il.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Jia He <justin.he@....com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>,
Punit Agrawal <punitagrawal@...il.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Jun Yao <yaojun8558363@...il.com>,
Alex Van Brunt <avanbrunt@...dia.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
Kaly Xin <Kaly.Xin@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] mm: fix double page fault on arm64 if PTE_AF is
cleared
Hi Kirill
[On behalf of justin.he@....com because some mails are filted...]
On 2019/9/18 22:00, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 09:19:14PM +0800, Jia He wrote:
>> When we tested pmdk unit test [1] vmmalloc_fork TEST1 in arm64 guest, there
>> will be a double page fault in __copy_from_user_inatomic of cow_user_page.
>>
>> Below call trace is from arm64 do_page_fault for debugging purpose
>> [ 110.016195] Call trace:
>> [ 110.016826] do_page_fault+0x5a4/0x690
>> [ 110.017812] do_mem_abort+0x50/0xb0
>> [ 110.018726] el1_da+0x20/0xc4
>> [ 110.019492] __arch_copy_from_user+0x180/0x280
>> [ 110.020646] do_wp_page+0xb0/0x860
>> [ 110.021517] __handle_mm_fault+0x994/0x1338
>> [ 110.022606] handle_mm_fault+0xe8/0x180
>> [ 110.023584] do_page_fault+0x240/0x690
>> [ 110.024535] do_mem_abort+0x50/0xb0
>> [ 110.025423] el0_da+0x20/0x24
>>
>> The pte info before __copy_from_user_inatomic is (PTE_AF is cleared):
>> [ffff9b007000] pgd=000000023d4f8003, pud=000000023da9b003, pmd=000000023d4b3003, pte=360000298607bd3
>>
>> As told by Catalin: "On arm64 without hardware Access Flag, copying from
>> user will fail because the pte is old and cannot be marked young. So we
>> always end up with zeroed page after fork() + CoW for pfn mappings. we
>> don't always have a hardware-managed access flag on arm64."
>>
>> This patch fix it by calling pte_mkyoung. Also, the parameter is
>> changed because vmf should be passed to cow_user_page()
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/pmem/pmdk/tree/master/src/test/vmmalloc_fork
>>
>> Reported-by: Yibo Cai <Yibo.Cai@....com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin.he@....com>
>> ---
>> mm/memory.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
>> index e2bb51b6242e..d2c130a5883b 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory.c
>> @@ -118,6 +118,13 @@ int randomize_va_space __read_mostly =
>> 2;
>> #endif
>>
>> +#ifndef arch_faults_on_old_pte
>> +static inline bool arch_faults_on_old_pte(void)
>> +{
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
>> static int __init disable_randmaps(char *s)
>> {
>> randomize_va_space = 0;
>> @@ -2140,8 +2147,12 @@ static inline int pte_unmap_same(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd,
>> return same;
>> }
>>
>> -static inline void cow_user_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src, unsigned long va, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>> +static inline void cow_user_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src,
>> + struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> {
>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
>> + unsigned long addr = vmf->address;
>> +
>> debug_dma_assert_idle(src);
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -2152,20 +2163,34 @@ static inline void cow_user_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src, unsigned lo
>> */
>> if (unlikely(!src)) {
>> void *kaddr = kmap_atomic(dst);
>> - void __user *uaddr = (void __user *)(va & PAGE_MASK);
>> + void __user *uaddr = (void __user *)(addr & PAGE_MASK);
>> + pte_t entry;
>>
>> /*
>> * This really shouldn't fail, because the page is there
>> * in the page tables. But it might just be unreadable,
>> * in which case we just give up and fill the result with
>> - * zeroes.
>> + * zeroes. On architectures with software "accessed" bits,
>> + * we would take a double page fault here, so mark it
>> + * accessed here.
>> */
>> + if (arch_faults_on_old_pte() && !pte_young(vmf->orig_pte)) {
>> + spin_lock(vmf->ptl);
>> + if (likely(pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte))) {
>> + entry = pte_mkyoung(vmf->orig_pte);
>> + if (ptep_set_access_flags(vma, addr,
>> + vmf->pte, entry, 0))
>> + update_mmu_cache(vma, addr, vmf->pte);
>> + }
> I don't follow.
>
> So if pte has changed under you, you don't set the accessed bit, but never
> the less copy from the user.
>
> What makes you think it will not trigger the same problem?
>
> I think we need to make cow_user_page() fail in this case and caller --
> wp_page_copy() -- return zero. If the fault was solved by other thread, we
> are fine. If not userspace would re-fault on the same address and we will
> handle the fault from the second attempt.
Thanks for the pointing. How about make cow_user_page() be returned
VM_FAULT_RETRY? Then in do_page_fault(), it can retry the page fault?
---
Cheers,
Justin (Jia He)
>
>> + spin_unlock(vmf->ptl);
>> + }
>> +
>> if (__copy_from_user_inatomic(kaddr, uaddr, PAGE_SIZE))
>> clear_page(kaddr);
>> kunmap_atomic(kaddr);
>> flush_dcache_page(dst);
>> } else
>> - copy_user_highpage(dst, src, va, vma);
>> + copy_user_highpage(dst, src, addr, vma);
>> }
>>
>> static gfp_t __get_fault_gfp_mask(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>> @@ -2318,7 +2343,7 @@ static vm_fault_t wp_page_copy(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> vmf->address);
>> if (!new_page)
>> goto oom;
>> - cow_user_page(new_page, old_page, vmf->address, vma);
>> + cow_user_page(new_page, old_page, vmf);
>> }
>>
>> if (mem_cgroup_try_charge_delay(new_page, mm, GFP_KERNEL, &memcg, false))
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
>>
--
Powered by blists - more mailing lists