linux-kernel - Re: [next] arm64: boot failed

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, 9 Jun 2022 08:23:25 -0700
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Vasily Averin <vvs@...nvz.org>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        regressions@...ts.linux.dev, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Raghuram Thammiraju <raghuram.thammiraju@....com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Qian Cai <quic_qiancai@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [next] arm64: boot failed - next-20220606

On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:26 AM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 11:11:54AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 11:44:09AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > On 2022/6/9 10:49, Vasily Averin wrote:
> > > > mem_cgroup_from_obj():
> > > > ffff80000836cf40:       d503245f        bti     c
> > > > ffff80000836cf44:       d503201f        nop
> > > > ffff80000836cf48:       d503201f        nop
> > > > ffff80000836cf4c:       d503233f        paciasp
> > > > ffff80000836cf50:       d503201f        nop
> > > > ffff80000836cf54:       d2e00021        mov     x1, #0x1000000000000            // #281474976710656
> > > > ffff80000836cf58:       8b010001        add     x1, x0, x1
> > > > ffff80000836cf5c:       b25657e4        mov     x4, #0xfffffc0000000000         // #-4398046511104
> > > > ffff80000836cf60:       d34cfc21        lsr     x1, x1, #12
> > > > ffff80000836cf64:       d37ae421        lsl     x1, x1, #6
> > > > ffff80000836cf68:       8b040022        add     x2, x1, x4
> > > > ffff80000836cf6c:       f9400443        ldr     x3, [x2, #8]
> > > >
> > > > x5 : ffff80000a96f000 x4 : fffffc0000000000 x3 : ffff80000ad5e680
> > > > x2 : fffffe00002bc240 x1 : 00000200002bc240 x0 : ffff80000af09740
> > > >
> > > > x0 = 0xffff80000af09740 is an argument of mem_cgroup_from_obj()
> > > > according to System.map it is init_net
> > > >
> > > > This issue is caused by calling virt_to_page() on address of static variable init_net.
> > > > Arm64 consider that addresses of static variables are not valid virtual addresses.
> > > > On x86_64 the same API works without any problem.
> >
> > This just depends on whether or not the kernel is running out of the linear
> > mapping or not. On arm64, we use the vmalloc area for the kernel image and
> > so virt_to_page() won't work, just like it won't work for modules on other
> > architectures.
> >
> > How are module addresses handled by mem_cgroup_from_obj()?
>
> It doesn't look like they are handled in any way. It just expects the
> pointer to be a linear map one.

Yes, that is correct.

> Something like below:
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 27cebaa53472..795bf3673fa7 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -2860,6 +2860,11 @@ struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_from_obj(void *p)
>         if (mem_cgroup_disabled())
>                 return NULL;
>
> +       if (is_module_address((unsigned long)p))
> +               return NULL;
> +       else if (is_kernel((unsigned long)p))
> +               return NULL;
> +

How about just is_vmalloc_addr(p) check? It should cover modules and
also arm64 using vmalloc for kernel image cases.

>         folio = virt_to_folio(p);
>
>         /*
>
> --
> Catalin