linux-kernel - Re: [ACPI] b13663bdf9: BUG:sleeping_function_called_from_invalid_context_at

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 18 May 2020 12:44:55 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Erik Kaneda <erik.kaneda@...el.com>,
        Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [ACPI] b13663bdf9: BUG:sleeping_function_called_from_invalid_context_at_kernel/locking/mutex.c

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:08 AM James Morse <james.morse@....com> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> On 12/05/2020 19:05, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 9:28 AM Rafael J. Wysocki
> > <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com> wrote:
> >> Dan,
> >>
> >> Has this been addressed in the v2?
> >
> > No, this looks like a case I was concerned about, i.e. the GHES code
> > is not being completely careful to avoid calling potentially sleeping
> > functions with interrupts disabled. There is the nice comment that
> > indicates that the fixmap should be used when ghes_notify_lock_irq()
> > is held, but there seems to be no infrastructure to use / divert to
> > the fixmap in the ghes_proc() path.
>
> ghes_map()/ghes_unmap() use the fixmap for reading the firmware provided records,
> but this came through apei_read(), which claims to be IRQ and NMI safe...
>
>
> > That needs to be reworked first.
> > It seems the implementation was getting lucky before to hit the cached
> > acpi_ioremap in this path under rcu_read_lock(), but it appears it
> > should have always been using the fixmap. Ying, James, is my read
> > correct?
>
> The path through this thing is pretty tortuous: The static HEST contains the address of
> the pointer that firmware updates to point to CPER records when they are generated. This
> pointer might be static (records are always in the same place), it might not.
>
> The address in the tables is static. ghes.c maps it in ghes_new():
> |       rc = apei_map_generic_address(&generic->error_status_address);
>
> which happens before the ghes_add_timer()/request_irq()/ghes_nmi_add() stuff, so we should
> always use the existing mapping.
>
> __ghes_peek_estatus() reads the pointer with apei_read(), which should use the mapping
> from ghes_new(), then uses ghes_copy_tofrom_phys() which uses the fixmap to read the CPER
> records.
>
>
> Does apei_map_generic_address() no longer keep the GAR/address mapped?
> (also possible I've totally mis-understood how ACPIs caching of mappings works!)

Upon further investigation the problem appears to be that
System-Memory OperationRegions are dynamically mapped at runtime for
ASL code. This results in every unmap event triggering eviction from
the cache and incurring synchronize_rcu_expedited(). The APEI code
avoids this path by taking an extra reference at the beginning of time
such that the rcu-walk through the cache at NMI time is guaranteed to
both succeed, and not trigger an unmap event.

So now I'm looking at whether System-Memory OperationRegions can be
generically pre-mapped in a similar fashion.