| 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: <231451ad4b5b4da5afe84889f4c29bfa@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 02:35:16 +0000
From: "zhangwensheng (E)" <zhangwensheng5@...wei.com>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
CC: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: 答复: [PATCH -next v3] bfq: fix use-after-free in bfq_dispatch_request
Hi paolo：
Thanks for your question, it is my negligence.
I have two ideas for repairing the problem:
1. use ref++ to avoid the in_serv_queue being released. Patch as follow:
block/bfq-iosched.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index fec18118dc30..70bd280170f9 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -5066,6 +5066,7 @@ static struct request *bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
in_serv_queue = bfqd->in_service_queue;
+ in_serv_queue->ref++; /* aviod in_serv_queue release */
waiting_rq = in_serv_queue && bfq_bfqq_wait_request(in_serv_queue);
rq = __bfq_dispatch_request(hctx);
@@ -5077,6 +5078,10 @@ static struct request *bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
bfq_update_dispatch_stats(hctx->queue, rq, in_serv_queue,
idle_timer_disabled);
+ /* resume in_serv_queue */
+ spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
+ bfq_put_queue(in_serv_queue);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
return rq;
}
2. add new changes to previous, taking out bfqq_group(in_serv_queue) from bfq_update_dispatch_stats. Patch as follow:
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -5007,7 +5007,7 @@ static struct request *__bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
#ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_CGROUP_DEBUG
static void bfq_update_dispatch_stats(struct request_queue *q,
struct request *rq,
- struct bfq_queue *in_serv_queue,
+ struct bfq_group *bfqg_in_serv,
bool idle_timer_disabled)
{
struct bfq_queue *bfqq = rq ? RQ_BFQQ(rq) : NULL;
@@ -5039,7 +5039,7 @@ static void bfq_update_dispatch_stats(struct request_queue *q,
* therefore guaranteed to exist because of the above
* arguments.
*/
- bfqg_stats_update_idle_time(bfqq_group(in_serv_queue));
+ bfqg_stats_update_idle_time(bfqg_in_serv);
if (bfqq) {
struct bfq_group *bfqg = bfqq_group(bfqq);
@@ -5052,7 +5052,7 @@ static void bfq_update_dispatch_stats(struct request_queue *q,
#else
static inline void bfq_update_dispatch_stats(struct request_queue *q,
struct request *rq,
- struct bfq_queue *in_serv_queue,
+ struct bfq_group *bfqg_in_serv,
bool idle_timer_disabled) {}
#endif /* CONFIG_BFQ_CGROUP_DEBUG */
@@ -5062,20 +5062,23 @@ static struct request *bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
struct request *rq;
struct bfq_queue *in_serv_queue;
bool waiting_rq, idle_timer_disabled;
+ struct bfq_group *bfqg_in_serv;
spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
in_serv_queue = bfqd->in_service_queue;
waiting_rq = in_serv_queue && bfq_bfqq_wait_request(in_serv_queue);
+ bfqg_in_serv = bfqq_group(in_serv_queue);
rq = __bfq_dispatch_request(hctx);
- idle_timer_disabled =
- waiting_rq && !bfq_bfqq_wait_request(in_serv_queue);
-
+ if (in_serv_queue == bfqd->in_service_queue) {
+ idle_timer_disabled =
+ waiting_rq && !bfq_bfqq_wait_request(in_serv_queue);
+ }
spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
- bfq_update_dispatch_stats(hctx->queue, rq, in_serv_queue,
+ bfq_update_dispatch_stats(hctx->queue, rq, bfqg_in_serv,
idle_timer_disabled);
return rq;
what do you think?
Thanks
Zhang Wensheng
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Paolo Valente [mailto:paolo.valente@...aro.org]
发送时间: 2021年12月17日 0:28
收件人: zhangwensheng (E) <zhangwensheng5@...wei.com>
抄送: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>; linux-block@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
主题: Re: [PATCH -next v3] bfq: fix use-after-free in bfq_dispatch_request
> Il giorno 16 dic 2021, alle ore 13:21, Zhang Wensheng <zhangwensheng5@...wei.com> ha scritto:
>
> KASAN reports a use-after-free report when doing normal scsi-mq test
>
> [69832.239032]
> ==================================================================
> [69832.241810] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in
> bfq_dispatch_request+0x1045/0x44b0
> [69832.243267] Read of size 8 at addr ffff88802622ba88 by task
> kworker/3:1H/155 [69832.244656] [69832.245007] CPU: 3 PID: 155 Comm:
> kworker/3:1H Not tainted 5.10.0-10295-g576c6382529e #8 [69832.246626]
> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS
> rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [69832.249069]
> Workqueue: kblockd blk_mq_run_work_fn [69832.250022] Call Trace:
> [69832.250541] dump_stack+0x9b/0xce
> [69832.251232] ? bfq_dispatch_request+0x1045/0x44b0
> [69832.252243] print_address_description.constprop.6+0x3e/0x60
> [69832.253381] ? __cpuidle_text_end+0x5/0x5 [69832.254211] ?
> vprintk_func+0x6b/0x120 [69832.254994] ?
> bfq_dispatch_request+0x1045/0x44b0
> [69832.255952] ? bfq_dispatch_request+0x1045/0x44b0
> [69832.256914] kasan_report.cold.9+0x22/0x3a [69832.257753] ?
> bfq_dispatch_request+0x1045/0x44b0
> [69832.258755] check_memory_region+0x1c1/0x1e0 [69832.260248]
> bfq_dispatch_request+0x1045/0x44b0
> [69832.261181] ? bfq_bfqq_expire+0x2440/0x2440 [69832.262032] ?
> blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queues+0xf9/0x170
> [69832.263022] __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched+0x52f/0x830
> [69832.264011] ? blk_mq_sched_request_inserted+0x100/0x100
> [69832.265101] __blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x398/0x4f0
> [69832.266206] ? blk_mq_do_dispatch_ctx+0x570/0x570
> [69832.267147] ? __switch_to+0x5f4/0xee0 [69832.267898]
> blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0xdf/0x140
> [69832.268946] __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xc0/0x270 [69832.269840]
> blk_mq_run_work_fn+0x51/0x60 [69832.278170]
> process_one_work+0x6d4/0xfe0 [69832.278984] worker_thread+0x91/0xc80
> [69832.279726] ? __kthread_parkme+0xb0/0x110 [69832.280554] ?
> process_one_work+0xfe0/0xfe0 [69832.281414] kthread+0x32d/0x3f0
> [69832.282082] ? kthread_park+0x170/0x170 [69832.282849]
> ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 [69832.283573] [69832.283886] Allocated by
> task 7725:
> [69832.284599] kasan_save_stack+0x19/0x40 [69832.285385]
> __kasan_kmalloc.constprop.2+0xc1/0xd0
> [69832.286350] kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x13f/0x460 [69832.287237]
> bfq_get_queue+0x3d4/0x1140 [69832.287993]
> bfq_get_bfqq_handle_split+0x103/0x510
> [69832.289015] bfq_init_rq+0x337/0x2d50 [69832.289749]
> bfq_insert_requests+0x304/0x4e10 [69832.290634]
> blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0x13e/0x390
> [69832.291629] blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x4b4/0x760
> [69832.292538] blk_flush_plug_list+0x2c5/0x480 [69832.293392]
> io_schedule_prepare+0xb2/0xd0 [69832.294209]
> io_schedule_timeout+0x13/0x80 [69832.295014]
> wait_for_common_io.constprop.1+0x13c/0x270
> [69832.296137] submit_bio_wait+0x103/0x1a0 [69832.296932]
> blkdev_issue_discard+0xe6/0x160 [69832.297794]
> blk_ioctl_discard+0x219/0x290 [69832.298614]
> blkdev_common_ioctl+0x50a/0x1750 [69832.304715]
> blkdev_ioctl+0x470/0x600 [69832.305474] block_ioctl+0xde/0x120
> [69832.306232] vfs_ioctl+0x6c/0xc0 [69832.306877]
> __se_sys_ioctl+0x90/0xa0 [69832.307629] do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x40
> [69832.308362] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> [69832.309382]
> [69832.309701] Freed by task 155:
> [69832.310328] kasan_save_stack+0x19/0x40 [69832.311121]
> kasan_set_track+0x1c/0x30 [69832.311868]
> kasan_set_free_info+0x1b/0x30 [69832.312699]
> __kasan_slab_free+0x111/0x160 [69832.313524]
> kmem_cache_free+0x94/0x460 [69832.314367] bfq_put_queue+0x582/0x940
> [69832.315112] __bfq_bfqd_reset_in_service+0x166/0x1d0
> [69832.317275] bfq_bfqq_expire+0xb27/0x2440 [69832.318084]
> bfq_dispatch_request+0x697/0x44b0 [69832.318991]
> __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched+0x52f/0x830
> [69832.319984] __blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x398/0x4f0
> [69832.321087] blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0xdf/0x140
> [69832.322225] __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xc0/0x270 [69832.323114]
> blk_mq_run_work_fn+0x51/0x60 [69832.323942]
> process_one_work+0x6d4/0xfe0 [69832.324772] worker_thread+0x91/0xc80
> [69832.325518] kthread+0x32d/0x3f0 [69832.326205]
> ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 [69832.326932] [69832.338297] The buggy
> address belongs to the object at ffff88802622b968 [69832.338297]
> which belongs to the cache bfq_queue of size 512 [69832.340766] The
> buggy address is located 288 bytes inside of [69832.340766] 512-byte
> region [ffff88802622b968, ffff88802622bb68) [69832.343091] The buggy
> address belongs to the page:
> [69832.344097] page:ffffea0000988a00 refcount:1 mapcount:0
> mapping:0000000000000000 index:0xffff88802622a528 pfn:0x26228
> [69832.346214] head:ffffea0000988a00 order:2 compound_mapcount:0
> compound_pincount:0 [69832.347719] flags: 0x1fffff80010200(slab|head)
> [69832.348625] raw: 001fffff80010200 ffffea0000dbac08 ffff888017a57650
> ffff8880179fe840 [69832.354972] raw: ffff88802622a528 0000000000120008
> 00000001ffffffff 0000000000000000 [69832.356547] page dumped because:
> kasan: bad access detected [69832.357652] [69832.357970] Memory state around the buggy address:
> [69832.358926] ffff88802622b980: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb
> fb fb fb fb [69832.360358] ffff88802622ba00: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb
> fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb [69832.361810] >ffff88802622ba80: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb
> [69832.363273] ^
> [69832.363975] ffff88802622bb00: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb
> fb fc fc fc [69832.375960] ffff88802622bb80: fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc
> fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc [69832.377405]
> ==================================================================
>
> In bfq_dispatch_requestfunction, it may have function call:
>
> bfq_dispatch_request
> __bfq_dispatch_request
> bfq_select_queue
> bfq_bfqq_expire
> __bfq_bfqd_reset_in_service
> bfq_put_queue
> kmem_cache_free
> In this function call, in_serv_queue has beed expired and meet the
> conditions to free. In the function bfq_dispatch_request, the address
> of in_serv_queue pointing to has been released. For getting the value
> of idle_timer_disabled, it will get flags value from the address which
> in_serv_queue pointing to, then the problem of use-after-free happens;
>
> Fix the problem by check in_serv_queue == bfqd->in_service_queue, to
> get the value of idle_timer_disabled if in_serve_queue is equel to
> bfqd->in_service_queue. If the space of in_serv_queue pointing has
> been released, this judge will aviod use-after-free problem.
> And if in_serv_queue may be expired but it still exists, this judge
> may have little effects on the function bfqg_stats_update_idle_time in
> bfq_update_dispatch_stats.
>
> Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@...wei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Wensheng <zhangwensheng5@...wei.com>
> ---
> block/bfq-iosched.c | 9 +++++----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c index
> fec18118dc30..97533634b99e 100644
> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
> @@ -5061,7 +5061,7 @@ static struct request *bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
> struct bfq_data *bfqd = hctx->queue->elevator->elevator_data;
> struct request *rq;
> struct bfq_queue *in_serv_queue;
> - bool waiting_rq, idle_timer_disabled;
> + bool waiting_rq, idle_timer_disabled = false;
>
> spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
>
> @@ -5070,9 +5070,10 @@ static struct request
> *bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
>
> rq = __bfq_dispatch_request(hctx);
>
> - idle_timer_disabled =
> - waiting_rq && !bfq_bfqq_wait_request(in_serv_queue);
> -
> + if (in_serv_queue == bfqd->in_service_queue) {
> + idle_timer_disabled =
> + waiting_rq && !bfq_bfqq_wait_request(in_serv_queue);
> + }
Good catch!
> spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
>
> bfq_update_dispatch_stats(hctx->queue, rq, in_serv_queue,
Yet, what about the above use of in_serv_queue then?
Thanks,
Paolo
> --
> 2.31.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists