linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v4 4/7] arm64: add copy_{to, from}

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:   Thu, 5 May 2022 22:33:41 +0800
From:   Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
CC:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>,
        Guohanjun <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v4 4/7] arm64: add copy_{to, from}_user to machine
 check safe



在 2022/5/5 21:41, Catalin Marinas 写道:
> On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 02:39:43PM +0800, Tong Tiangen wrote:
>> 在 2022/5/4 18:26, Catalin Marinas 写道:
>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 03:04:15AM +0000, Tong Tiangen wrote:
>>>> Add copy_{to, from}_user() to machine check safe.
>>>>
>>>> If copy fail due to hardware memory error, only the relevant processes are
>>>> affected, so killing the user process and isolate the user page with
>>>> hardware memory errors is a more reasonable choice than kernel panic.
>>>
>>> Just to make sure I understand - we can only recover if the fault is in
>>> a user page. That is, for a copy_from_user(), we can only handle the
>>> faults in the source address, not the destination.
>>
>> At the beginning, I also thought we can only recover if the fault is in a
>> user page.
>> After discussion with a Mark[1], I think no matter user page or kernel page,
>> as long as it is triggered by the user process, only related processes will
>> be affected. According to this
>> understanding, it seems that all uaccess can be recovered.
>>
>> [1]https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/20220406091311.3354723-6-tongtiangen@huawei.com/
> 
> We can indeed safely skip this copy and return an error just like
> pretending there was a user page fault. However, my point was more
> around the "isolate the user page with hardware memory errors". If the
> fault is on a kernel address, there's not much you can do about. You'll
> likely trigger it later when you try to access that address (maybe it
> was freed and re-allocated). Do we hope we won't get the same error
> again on that kernel address?

I think the page with memory error will be isolated by memory_failure(), 
generally, isolation will succeed, if isolate failure(we need to find 
out why), then maybe the same error will trigger it later.

Thanks.

>