linux-kernel - Re: BUG: Bad page state in process dirtyc0w

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]

Message-ID: <20200922190350.7a0e0ca5@thinkpad>
Date:   Tue, 22 Sep 2020 19:03:50 +0200
From:   Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Qian Cai <cai@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG: Bad page state in process dirtyc0w_child

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:28:06 +0200
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 09:54:12PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> > Occasionally, running this LTP test will trigger an error below on
> > s390:
> > https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/testcases/kernel/security/dirtyc0w/dirtyc0w.c
> > https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/testcases/kernel/security/dirtyc0w/dirtyc0w_child.c
> > 
> > this .config:
> > https://gitlab.com/cailca/linux-mm/-/blob/master/s390.config
> > 
> > [ 6970.253173] LTP: starting dirtyc0w
> > [ 6971.599102] BUG: Bad page state in process dirtyc0w_child  pfn:8865d
> > [ 6971.599867] page:000000001a8328d7 refcount:0 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x8865d
> > [ 6971.599876] flags: 0x400000000008000e(referenced|uptodate|dirty|swapbacked)
> > [ 6971.599886] raw: 400000000008000e 0000000000000100 0000000000000122 0000000000000000
> > [ 6971.599893] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ffffffff00000000 0000000000000000
> > [ 6971.599900] page dumped because: PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_FREE flag(s) set
> > [ 6971.599906] Modules linked in: loop kvm ip_tables x_tables dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: dummy_del_mod]
> > [ 6971.599952] CPU: 1 PID: 65238 Comm: dirtyc0w_child Tainted: G           O      5.9.0-rc4-next-20200909 #1
> > [ 6971.599959] Hardware name: IBM 2964 N96 400 (z/VM 6.4.0)
> > [ 6971.599964] Call Trace:
> > [ 6971.599979]  [<0000000073aec038>] show_stack+0x158/0x1f0 
> > [ 6971.599986]  [<0000000073af724a>] dump_stack+0x1f2/0x238 
> > [ 6971.599994]  [<0000000072ed086a>] bad_page+0x1ba/0x1c0 
> > [ 6971.600000]  [<0000000072ed20c4>] free_pcp_prepare+0x4fc/0x658 
> > [ 6971.600006]  [<0000000072ed96a6>] free_unref_page+0xae/0x158 
> > [ 6971.600013]  [<0000000072e8286a>] unmap_page_range+0xb62/0x1df8 
> > [ 6971.600019]  [<0000000072e83bbc>] unmap_single_vma+0xbc/0x1c8 
> > [ 6971.600025]  [<0000000072e8418e>] zap_page_range+0x176/0x230 
> > [ 6971.600033]  [<0000000072eece8e>] do_madvise+0xfde/0x1270 
> > [ 6971.600039]  [<0000000072eed50a>] __s390x_sys_madvise+0x72/0x98 
> > [ 6971.600047]  [<0000000073b1cce4>] system_call+0xdc/0x278 
> > [ 6971.600053] 2 locks held by dirtyc0w_child/65238:
> > [ 6971.600058]  #0: 000000013442fa18 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: do_madvise+0x17a/0x1270
> > [ 6971.600432]  #1: 00000001343f9060 (ptlock_ptr(page)#2){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: unmap_page_range+0x640/0x1df8
> > [ 6971.600487] Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint
> > 
> > Once it happens, running it again will trigger in on another PFN.
> > 
> > [39717.085115] BUG: Bad page state in process dirtyc0w_child  pfn:af065 
> > 
> > Any thoughts?  
> 
> Alexander, Gerald, could you take a look?

Thanks for reporting. From the header of dirtyc0w.c it seems that this
is testing some gup behavior. Given that we have an issue with gup_fast
on s390, this could be related. I'll try to reproduce and do more
analysis.

A fix for our gup_fast issue is also in linux-next now, as of 2020-09-20,
but it was not yet included in your kernel version 5.9.0-rc4-next-20200909.
So if this is related to the gup_fast issue, it should not occur again
with linux-next kernels after 2020-09-20.