linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] mm, slub: remove runtime allocation order changes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <202006051406.A7AF17B6@keescook>
Date:   Fri, 5 Jun 2020 14:06:49 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:     Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
        vinmenon@...eaurora.org, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] mm, slub: remove runtime allocation order changes

On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 04:15:17PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> SLUB allows runtime changing of page allocation order by writing into the
> /sys/kernel/slab/<cache>/order file. Jann has reported [1] that this interface
> allows the order to be set too small, leading to crashes.
> 
> While it's possible to fix the immediate issue, closer inspection reveals
> potential races. Storing the new order calls calculate_sizes() which
> non-atomically updates a lot of kmem_cache fields while the cache is still in
> use. Unexpected behavior might occur even if the fields are set to the same
> value as they were.
> 
> This could be fixed by splitting out the part of calculate_sizes() that depends
> on forced_order, so that we only update kmem_cache.oo field. This could still
> race with init_cache_random_seq(), shuffle_freelist(), allocate_slab(). Perhaps
> it's possible to audit and e.g. add some READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE accesses, it
> might be easier just to remove the runtime order changes, which is what this
> patch does. If there are valid usecases for per-cache order setting, we could
> e.g. extend the boot parameters to do that.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAG48ez31PP--h6_FzVyfJ4H86QYczAFPdxtJHUEEan+7VJETAQ@mail.gmail.com
> 
> Reported-by: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>

-- 
Kees Cook