linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access

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: <20210401115523.GZ1463678@nvidia.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Apr 2021 08:55:23 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        bskeggs@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        jhubbard@...dia.com, rcampbell@...dia.com, jglisse@...hat.com,
        hch@...radead.org, daniel@...ll.ch, willy@...radead.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access

On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 01:20:05PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> On Thursday, 1 April 2021 11:48:13 AM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:45:57AM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > > On Thursday, 1 April 2021 12:46:04 AM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:27:52AM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, 1 April 2021 12:18:54 AM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:59:28PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I guess that makes sense as the split could go either way at the
> > > > > > > moment but I should add a check to make sure this isn't used with
> > > > > > > pinned pages anyway.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Is it possible to have a pinned page under one of these things? If I
> > > > > > pin it before you migrate it then it remains pinned but hidden under
> > > > > > the swap entry?
> > > > > 
> > > > > At the moment yes. But I had planned (and this reminded me) to add a 
> check 
> > > to 
> > > > > prevent marking pinned pages for exclusive access. 
> > > > 
> > > > How do you even do that without races with GUP fast?
> > > 
> > > Unless I've missed something I think I've convinced myself it should be 
> safe 
> > > to do the pin check after make_device_exclusive() has replaced all the 
> PTEs 
> > > with exclusive entries.
> > > 
> > > GUP fast sequence:
> > > 1. Read PTE
> > > 2. Pin page
> > > 3. Check PTE
> > > 4. if PTE changed -> unpin and fallback
> > > 
> > > If make_device_exclusive() runs after (1) it will either succeed or see 
> the 
> > > pin from (2) and fail (as desired). GUP should always see the PTE change 
> and 
> > > fallback which will revoke the exclusive access.
> > 
> > AFAICT the user can trigger fork at that instant and fork will try to
> > copy the desposited migration entry before it has been checked
> 
> In that case the child will get a read-only exclusive entry and eventually a 
> page copy via do_wp_page() 

Having do_wp_page() do a copy is a security bug. We closed it with the
at-fork checks.

Jason