linux-kernel - Re: [syzbot] general protection fault in list_lru

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]

Date:   Wed, 23 Mar 2022 20:05:11 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc:     syzbot <syzbot+f8c45ccc7d5d45fc5965@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [syzbot] general protection fault in list_lru_add

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 7:19 PM Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> wrote:
>
> After this commit, the rules of dentry allocations changed.
> The dentry should be allocated by kmem_cache_alloc_lru()

Yeah, I looked at that, but I can't find any way there could be other
allocations - not only are there strict rules how to initialize
everything, but the dentries are free'd using

        kmem_cache_free(dentry_cache, dentry);

and as a result if they were allocated any other way I would expect
things would go south very quickly.

The only other thing I could come up with is some breakage in the
superblock lifetime so that &dentry->d_sb->s_dentry_lru would have
problems, but again, this is *such* core code and not some unusual
path, that I would be very very surprised if it wouldn't have
triggered other issues long long ago.

That's why I'd be more inclined to worry about the list_lru code being
somehow broken.

               Linus