[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAeHK+w3n3f4iA_WmAKAr+mKRxu+0Trfs7mGD=i2SWodfF448A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 15:45:56 +0200
From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Walter Wu <walter-zh.wu@...iatek.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@...iatek.com>,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] kasan: add tests for workqueue stack recording
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 1:49 PM Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 10:14, Walter Wu <walter-zh.wu@...iatek.com> wrote:
> >
> > Adds a test to verify workqueue stack recording and print it in
> > KASAN report.
> >
> > The KASAN report was as follows(cleaned up slightly):
> >
> > BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in kasan_workqueue_uaf
> >
> > Freed by task 54:
> > kasan_save_stack+0x24/0x50
> > kasan_set_track+0x24/0x38
> > kasan_set_free_info+0x20/0x40
> > __kasan_slab_free+0x10c/0x170
> > kasan_slab_free+0x10/0x18
> > kfree+0x98/0x270
> > kasan_workqueue_work+0xc/0x18
> >
> > Last potentially related work creation:
> > kasan_save_stack+0x24/0x50
> > kasan_record_wq_stack+0xa8/0xb8
> > insert_work+0x48/0x288
> > __queue_work+0x3e8/0xc40
> > queue_work_on+0xf4/0x118
> > kasan_workqueue_uaf+0xfc/0x190
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Walter Wu <walter-zh.wu@...iatek.com>
> > Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
> > Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
> > Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
> > ---
> > lib/test_kasan.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>
> These will majorly conflict with the KASAN-test KUnit rework, which I
> don't know what the status is. AFAIK, these are not yet in -mm tree.
I've asked Andrew to take those in 5.9, but that didn't happen.
Perhaps we should ping him again after Plumbers.
> I think the KASAN-test KUnit rework has priority, as rebasing that
> work on top of this patch is going to be difficult. So maybe these
> test additions can be declared optional if there are conflicts coming,
> and if that'll be the case you'll have to rebase and resend the test.
Yeah, either waiting for KASAN+Kunit or separating the tests sounds
like plausible approaches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists