linux-kernel - Re: Regression: NULL pointer dereference after NFS_V4_2_READ

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]

Message-ID: <2C5E9725-F152-4D2E-882E-CF92A35481BF@hammerspace.com>
Date:   Sun, 8 Jan 2023 17:09:43 +0000
From:   Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
CC:     Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@...app.com>,
        linux-nfs <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "regressions@...ts.linux.dev" <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: Regression: NULL pointer dereference after NFS_V4_2_READ_PLUS
 (commit 7fd461c47)

Hi Krzysztof,

> On Jan 8, 2023, at 08:25, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> [You don't often get email from krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification]
> 
> On 07/01/2023 16:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Bisect identified commit 7fd461c47c6c ("NFSv4.2: Change the default
>> KConfig value for READ_PLUS") as one leading to NULL pointer exception
>> when mounting NFS root on NFSv4 client:
>> 
>> [   25.739003] systemd[1]: Set hostname to <odroidhc1>.
>> [   25.771714] systemd[1]: Failed to bump fs.file-max, ignoring: Invalid
>> argument
>> [   26.199478] 8<--- cut here ---
>> [   26.201366] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
>> virtual address 00000004
>> ...
>> [   26.555522]  mmiocpy from xdr_inline_decode+0xec/0x16c
>> [   26.560628]  xdr_inline_decode from nfs4_xdr_dec_read_plus+0x178/0x358
>> [   26.567130]  nfs4_xdr_dec_read_plus from call_decode+0x204/0x304
>> 
>> Full OOPS attached. Full log available here:
>> https://krzk.eu/#/builders/21/builds/3901/steps/15/logs/serial0
>> 
>> Disabling NFS_V4_2_READ_PLUS fixes the issue, so obviously the commit is
>> not the cause, but rather making it default caused the regression.
>> 
>> I did not make the bisect yet which commit introduced it, if every
>> config includes NFS_V4_2_READ_PLUS.
> 
> When every kernel is built with NFS_V4_2_READ_PLUS, bisect pointed to:
> d3b00a802c84 ("NFS: Replace the READ_PLUS decoding code")
> 
> commit d3b00a802c845a6021148ce2e669b5a0b5729959
> Author: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@...app.com>
> Date:   Thu Jul 21 14:21:34 2022 -0400
> 
>    NFS: Replace the READ_PLUS decoding code
> 
>    We now take a 2-step process that allows us to place data and hole
>    segments directly at their final position in the xdr_stream without
>    needing to do a bunch of redundant copies to expand holes. Due to the
>    variable lengths of each segment, the xdr metadata might cross page
>    boundaries which I account for by setting a small scratch buffer so
>    xdr_inline_decode() won't fail.
> 
>    Signed-off-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@...app.com>
>    Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>
> 
> With a trace:
> [   25.898462] systemd[1]: Set hostname to <odroidhc1>.
> [   25.933746] systemd[1]: Failed to bump fs.file-max, ignoring: Invalid
> argument
> [   25.986237] random: crng init done
> [   26.264564] 8<--- cut here ---
> [   26.266823] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> virtual address 00000fe8
> ...
> [   26.597263]  nfs4_xdr_dec_read_plus from call_decode+0x204/0x304
> [   26.603222]  call_decode from __rpc_execute+0xd0/0x890
> [   26.608328]  __rpc_execute from rpc_async_schedule+0x1c/0x34
> [   26.613960]  rpc_async_schedule from process_one_work+0x294/0x790
> [   26.620030]  process_one_work from worker_thread+0x54/0x518
> [   26.625570]  worker_thread from kthread+0xf4/0x128
> [   26.630336]  kthread from ret_from_fork+0x14/0x2c
> 

Is this test being run against a 6.2-rc2 server, or is it an older server platform? We know there were bugs in older server implementations, so the question is whether this might be a problem with handling a bad/corrupt RPC reply from the server, or whether it is happening against code that is supposed to have been fixed?

Thanks
  Trond

_________________________________
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trond.myklebust@...merspace.com