linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Avoid potential access of invalid memory in lock

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 3 Jan 2022 13:26:20 -0800
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Avoid potential access of invalid memory
 in lock_class

On 1/3/22 10:17, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 1/3/22 12:47, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 1/2/22 18:35, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> -    WARN_ON_ONCE(!found);
>>> -    __lockdep_free_key_range(pf, key, 1);
>>> -    call_rcu_zapped(pf);
>>> -    graph_unlock();
>>> -out_irq:
>>> +    WARN_ON_ONCE(!found && debug_locks);
>>
>> lockdep_unregister_key() should only be called for a registered key so 
>> I'd
>> like to keep the WARN_ON_ONCE(!found) here instead of changing it into
>> WARN_ON_ONCE(!found && debug_locks). Otherwise this patch looks good 
>> to me.
> 
> The reason for this change is to handle the case that a 
> lockdep_register_key()/lockdep_unregister_key() pair may be called after 
> debug_locks is turned off. Without that change, we are going to get the 
> warning in lockdep_unregister_key(). That is the motivation of your 
> original commit 8b39adbee805 ("locking/lockdep: Make 
> lockdep_unregister_key() honor 'debug_locks' again").

Ah, that's right. Hence:

Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>