| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <84c7a7e1-5f19-2578-3274-4b1bf4f348f6@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 11:34:29 +0100
From: Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@....de>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, jgg@...pe.ca
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: 5.10.1: UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in ./include/linux/log2.h:57:1
On 12/20/20 2:09 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 12/18/20 2:20 AM, Toralf Förster wrote:
>> On 12/18/20 7:54 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> [adding linux-mm]
>>>
>>> On 12/16/20 1:54 AM, Toralf Förster wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I got this recently at this hardened Gentoo Linux server:
>>>>
>>>> Linux mr-fox 5.10.1 #1 SMP Tue Dec 15 22:09:42 CET 2020 x86_64 Intel(R)
>>>> Xeon(R) CPU E5-1650 v3 @ 3.50GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206972]
>>>> ================================================================================
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206977] UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds
>>>> in ./include/linux/log2.h:57:13
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206980] shift exponent 64 is too
>>>> large for 64-bit type 'long unsigned int'
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206982] CPU: 11 PID: 21051 Comm:
>>>> cc1 Tainted: G T 5.10.1 #1
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206984] Hardware name: ASUSTeK
>>>> COMPUTER INC. Z10PA-U8 Series/Z10PA-U8 Series, BIOS 3703 08/02/2018
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206985] Call Trace:
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206993] dump_stack+0x57/0x6a
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206996] ubsan_epilogue+0x5/0x40
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.206999]
>>>> __ubsan_handle_shift_out_of_bounds.cold+0x61/0x10e
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207002]
>>>> ondemand_readahead.cold+0x16/0x21
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207007]
>>>> generic_file_buffered_read+0x452/0x890
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207011] new_sync_read+0x156/0x200
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207014] vfs_read+0xf8/0x190
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207016] ksys_read+0x65/0xe0
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207018] do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207021]
>>>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207024] RIP: 0033:0x7f01b2df198e
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207026] Code: c0 e9 b6 fe ff ff 50
>>>> 48 8d 3d 66 c3 09 00 e8 59 e2 01 00 66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 64 8b 04
>>>> 25 18 00 00 00 85 c0 75 14 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 5a c3 66 0f 1f
>>>> 84 00 00 00 00 00 48 83 ec 28
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207028] RSP: 002b:00007fff2167e998
>>>> EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000000
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207030] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX:
>>>> 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007f01b2df198e
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207032] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI:
>>>> 00000000054dcc50 RDI: 0000000000000004
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207033] RBP: 00000000054dcc50 R08:
>>>> 00000000054dcc50 R09: 0000000000000000
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207034] R10: 0000000000000000 R11:
>>>> 0000000000000246 R12: 00000000054dc3b0
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207035] R13: 0000000000008000 R14:
>>>> 00000000054c9800 R15: 0000000000000000
>>>> Dec 15 23:31:51 mr-fox kernel: [ 1974.207037]
>>>> ================================================================================
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Known issue ?
>>>
>>> Not that I have heard about, but that's not conclusive.
>>>
>>> Looks to me like this is in mm/readahead.c:
>>>
>>> static unsigned long get_init_ra_size(unsigned long size, unsigned long max)
>>> {
>>> unsigned long newsize = roundup_pow_of_two(size);
>>>
>>>
>>> What filesystem? What workload?
>>
>> / is a 32 GB ext4 filesystem.
>> Data are at 3 BTRFS filesystems, 1x 500 GB and 2x 1.6TB.
>>
>> 2 Tor relays run at 100% each and utilizes the 1 GBit/s by 50%-60% [1]
>>
>> 7 build bots are running over the Gentoo software repostory [2]
>> 1 AFL bot fuzzies the Tor sources.
>> Those 8 jobs are contained by a cgroup of 9 CPUs and 120 GB RAM [3],
>> each job is contained further by an own sub cgroup of 1.5 CPU and 20 GB
>> RAM [4]
>>
>> The host is monitored using sysstat, the load is about 11.8, CPU[all] at
>> 80%, proc/s at 1800, cswchs/s at 20000 and so on.
>>
>>
>> [1] https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/zwiebeltoralf
>> [2] https://zwiebeltoralf.de/tinderbox.html
>> [3] https://github.com/toralf/tinderbox/blob/master/bin/cgroup.sh
>> [4] https://github.com/toralf/tinderbox/blob/master/bin/bwrap.sh#L15
>>
>> --
>
> Hi Toralf,
>
> Is this something that happens more than once?
Till now only once.
> I think we would like to find out what is causing it.
> I see a couple of problems.
>
> (a)
> UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in ./include/linux/log2.h:57:13
> shift exponent 64 is too large for 64-bit type 'long unsigned int'
>
> <linux/log2.h>:57: is like so:
>
> 50 /**
> 51 * __roundup_pow_of_two() - round up to nearest power of two
> 52 * @n: value to round up
> 53 */
> 54 static inline __attribute__((const))
> 55 unsigned long __roundup_pow_of_two(unsigned long n)
> 56 {
> 57 return 1UL << fls_long(n - 1);
> 58 }
>
> It's OK/valid for fls_long() [fls64()] to return 64 for a bit
> position -- it just means the high-order bit in a 64-bit value.
> So this code should either always subtract 1 from fls_long() or
> do that if fls_long() == 64.
>
>
> (b) in mm/readahead.c:get_init_ra_size():
>
> 305 /*
> 306 * Set the initial window size, round to next power of 2 and square
> 307 * for small size, x 4 for medium, and x 2 for large
> 308 * for 128k (32 page) max ra
> 309 * 1-8 page = 32k initial, > 8 page = 128k initial
> 310 */
> 311 static unsigned long get_init_ra_size(unsigned long size, unsigned long max)
> 312 {
> 313 unsigned long newsize = roundup_pow_of_two(size);
>
> It looks like 'size' is either extremely large or it might be negative if
> it were a signed long instead of unsigned, so maybe it's 0x80000000_00000000
> or 0xffffffff_ffffffff or something similar. I think that we should add a
> WARN_ON_ONCE() there to try to catch whatever it is.
>
>
> Is this something that you could test if I send some patches?
Sure, no problem
> Unless other people have some other ideas, that is...
>
> thanks.
>
--
Toralf
Powered by blists - more mailing lists