linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 12/16] PCI: Obey iomem restrictions for procfs mmap

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: <CAKMK7uEWe8CaT7zjcZ6dJAKHxtxtqzjVB35fCFviwhcnqksDfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:42:11 +0200
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/16] PCI: Obey iomem restrictions for procfs mmap

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 2:50 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 10:56:51AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > There's three ways to access PCI BARs from userspace: /dev/mem, sysfs
> > files, and the old proc interface. Two check against
> > iomem_is_exclusive, proc never did. And with CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM,
> > this starts to matter, since we don't want random userspace having
> > access to PCI BARs while a driver is loaded and using it.
> >
> > Fix this by adding the same iomem_is_exclusive() check we already have
> > on the sysfs side in pci_mmap_resource().
> >
> > References: 90a545e98126 ("restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges")
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>
> > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
> > Cc: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> > Cc: linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
> > Cc: linux-media@...r.kernel.org
> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
> > Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.com>
>
> Maybe not for fixing in this series, but this access to
> IORESOURCE_BUSY doesn't have any locking.
>
> The write side holds the resource_lock at least..
>
> >       ret = pci_mmap_page_range(dev, i, vma,
> >                                 fpriv->mmap_state, write_combine);
>
> At this point the vma isn't linked into the address space, so doesn't
> this happen?
>
>      CPU 0                                  CPU1
>  mmap_region()
>    vma = vm_area_alloc
>    proc_bus_pci_mmap
>     iomem_is_exclusive
>     pci_mmap_page_range
>                                             revoke_devmem
>                                              unmap_mapping_range()
>      // vma is not linked to the address space here,
>      // unmap doesn't find it
>   vma_link()
>   !!! The VMA gets mapped with the revoked PTEs
>
> I couldn't find anything that prevents it at least, no mmap_sem on the
> unmap side, just the i_mmap_lock
>
> Not seeing how address space and pre-populating during mmap work
> together? Did I miss locking someplace?
>
> Not something to be fixed for this series, this is clearly an
> improvement, but seems like another problem to tackle?

Uh yes. In drivers/gpu this isn't a problem because we only install
ptes from the vm_ops->fault handler. So no races. And I don't think
you can fix this otherwise through holding locks: mmap_sem we can't
hold because before vma_link we don't even know which mm_struct is
involved, so can't solve the race. Plus this would be worse that
mm_take_all_locks used by mmu notifier. And the address_space
i_mmap_lock is also no good since it's not held during the ->mmap
callback, when we write the ptes. And the resource locks is even less
useful, since we're not going to hold that at vma_link() time for
sure.

Hence delaying the pte writes after the vma_link, which means ->fault
time, looks like the only way to close this gap.

Trouble is I have no idea how to do this cleanly ...
-Daniel



--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch