linux-kernel - Re: linuxnext-20191127 edac warns (was Re: edac KASAN warning in experimental arm64 allmodconfig boot)

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:   Thu, 28 Nov 2019 11:02:32 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Robert Richter <rrichter@...vell.com>
CC:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        wanghuiqiang <wanghuiqiang@...wei.com>,
        Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        "Huangming (Mark)" <huangming23@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: linuxnext-20191127 edac warns (was Re: edac KASAN warning in
 experimental arm64 allmodconfig boot)


Hi Robert,

> thank you for testing.

I'm just stumbling across these, TBH.

> 
> On 27.11.19 17:07:33, John Garry wrote:
> 
>> [snip]
>>
>> I have test enabled:
>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_TEST_DRIVER_REMOVE=y
>> +CONFIG_KASAN=y
>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK=y
> 
> Is this a regression (did it work before?), or a new test that you
> newly run?

linuxnext-20191119 does not look to have the issue - that's when I 
cherry-pick your refcount fix - but has lots of memory leaks:

root@(none)$
root@(none)$ echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
root@(none)$ [  121.639978] kmemleak: 128 new suspected memory leaks 
(see /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak)

root@(none)$ cat /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
unreferenced object 0xffff00236c24ba00 (size 256):
   comm "swapper/0", pid 1, jiffies 4294897826 (age 107.824s)
   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
     00 40 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff 00 48 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff  .@-<#....H-<#...
     00 50 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff 00 58 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff  .P-<#....X-<#...
   backtrace:
     [<0000000009aed8e3>] __kmalloc+0x1e0/0x2c0
     [<00000000bf599427>] edac_mc_alloc+0x31c/0x888
     [<00000000c070e314>] ghes_edac_register+0x15c/0x390
     [<00000000e4aad1c2>] ghes_probe+0x28c/0x5f0
     [<0000000079c357cb>] platform_drv_probe+0x70/0xd8
     [<00000000d4ab9188>] really_probe+0x118/0x548
     [<00000000763d50f1>] driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x148
     [<0000000058e623c3>] device_driver_attach+0x94/0xa0
     [<00000000d7cb679d>] __driver_attach+0xa4/0x110
     [<000000007d0942a0>] bus_for_each_dev+0xe8/0x158
     [<000000004cf734d1>] driver_attach+0x30/0x40
     [<000000009aa3536e>] bus_add_driver+0x234/0x2f0
     [<00000000d163cfe0>] driver_register+0xbc/0x1d0
     [<000000007e4f0ac1>] __platform_driver_register+0x7c/0x88
     [<00000000a63c8dd0>] ghes_init+0xbc/0x14c
     [<00000000356c8a7f>] do_one_initcall+0xb4/0x254
unreferenced object 0xffff00233c2d4000 (size 1024):
   comm "swapper/0", pid 1, jiffies 4294897826 (age 107.824s)
   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
   backtrace:
     [<000000004945469f>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x188/0x260
     [<0000000032ea779d>] edac_mc_alloc+0x38c/0x888

Unfortunately v5.4 has similar memory leaks.

Thanks,
John