linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: Fix rcu splat if vm creation fails

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]

Date:   Mon, 4 Nov 2019 12:18:10 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: Fix rcu splat if vm creation fails

On 04/11/19 07:27, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>
> 
> Reported by syzkaller:
> 
>    =============================
>    WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
>    -----------------------------
>    ./include/linux/kvm_host.h:536 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
>    
>    other info that might help us debug this:
> 
>    rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
>    no locks held by repro_11/12688.
>     
>    stack backtrace:
>    Call Trace:
>     dump_stack+0x7d/0xc5
>     lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0x123/0x170
>     kvm_dev_ioctl+0x9a9/0x1260 [kvm]
>     do_vfs_ioctl+0x1a1/0xfb0
>     ksys_ioctl+0x6d/0x80
>     __x64_sys_ioctl+0x73/0xb0
>     do_syscall_64+0x108/0xaa0
>     entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
> 
> Commit a97b0e773e4 (kvm: call kvm_arch_destroy_vm if vm creation fails)
> sets users_count to 1 before kvm_arch_init_vm(), however, if kvm_arch_init_vm()
> fails, we need to dec this count. Or, we can move the sets refcount after 
> kvm_arch_init_vm().

I don't understand this one, hasn't

        WARN_ON_ONCE(!refcount_dec_and_test(&kvm->users_count));

decreased the conut already?  With your patch the refcount would then
underflow.

Paolo