linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: bfq fix null pointer dereference of bfqg in bfq_bio

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, 12 Jan 2023 14:24:56 +0300
From:   Artem Chernyshev <artem.chernyshev@...-soft.ru>
To:     Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lvc-project@...uxtesting.org,
        Anton Fadeev <anton.fadeev@...-soft.ru>,
        "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: bfq fix null pointer dereference of bfqg in
 bfq_bio_bfqg()

Hi,
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 07:09:10PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 在 2023/01/12 17:43, Artem Chernyshev 写道:
> > It is possible for bfqg to be NULL after being initialized as result of
> > blkg_to_bfqg() function.
> > 
> > That was achieved on kernel 5.15.78, but should exist in mainline as
> > well
> 
> The problem is already fixed in mainline by following patch:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f02be9002c480cd3ec0fcf184ad27cf531bd6ece
> 
> Thanks,
> Kuai
> > 
> > host1 login: [ 460.855794] watchdog: watchdog0: watchdog did not stop!
> > [  898.944512] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000094
> > [  899.285776] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
> > [  899.536511] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
> > [  899.647305]  connection4:0: detected conn error (1020)
> > [  899.786794] PGD 0 P4D 0
> > [  899.786799] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI
> > [  899.786802] CPU: 15 PID: 6073 Comm: ID iothread1 Not tainted 5.15.78-1.el7virt.x86_64 #1
> > [  899.786804] Hardware name: HP ProLiant DL360 Gen9/ProLiant DL360 Gen9, BIOS P89 10/21/2019
> > [  899.786806] RIP: 0010:bfq_bio_bfqg+0x26/0x80
> > [  901.325944] Code: 0f 1f 40 00 0f 1f 44 00 00 55 48 89 fd 48 89 f7 53 48 8b 56 48 48 85 d2
> > 74 32 48 63 05 83 7f 35 01 48 83 c0 16 48 8b 5c c2 08 <80> bb 94 00 00 00 00 00
> > [  902.237825] RSP: 0018:ffffae2649437688 EFLAGS: 00010002
> > [  902.493396] RAX: 0000000000000019 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: dead000000000122
> > [  902.841529] RDX: ffff8b6012cb3a00 RSI: ffff8b71002bbed0 RDI: ffff8b71002bbed0
> > [  903.189374] RBP: ffff8b601c46e800 R08: ffffae26494377c8 R09: 0000000000000000
> > [  903.532985] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000008 R12: ffff8b6f844c5b30
> > [  903.880809] R13: ffff8b601c46e800 R14: ffffae2649437760 R15: ffff8b601c46e800
> > [  904.220054] FS:  00007fec2fc4a700(0000) GS:ffff8b7f7f640000(0000) kn1GS:00000000000000000
> > [  904.614349] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > [  904.894717] CR2: 0000000000000094 CR3: 0000000111fd8002 CR4: 00000000003726e0
> > [  905.243702] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> > [  905.592493] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> > [  905.936859] Call Trace:
> > [  906.055955] <TASK>
> > [  906.158109] bfq_bic_update_cgroup+0x2c/0x1f0
> > [  906.371057] bfq_insert_requests+0x2c2/0x1fb0
> > [  906.579207] blk_mq_sched_insert_request+0xc2/0x140
> > [  906.817640] __blk_mq_try_issue_directly+0xe0/0x1f0
> > [  907.055737] blk_mq_request_issue_directly+0x4e/0xa0
> > [  907.298547] dm_mq_queue_rq+0x217/0x3e0
> > [  907.485935] blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x14b/0x860
> > [  907.711973] ? sbitmap_get+0x87/0x1a0
> > [  907.890370] blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched+0x350/0x3b0
> > [  908.074869] NMI watchdog: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 40
> > 
> > Fixes: 075a53b78b81 ("bfq: Make sure bfqg for which we are queueing requests is online")
> > Co-developed-by: Anton Fadeev <anton.fadeev@...-soft.ru>
> > Signed-off-by: Anton Fadeev <anton.fadeev@...-soft.ru>
> > Signed-off-by: Artem Chernyshev <artem.chernyshev@...-soft.ru>
> > ---
> >   block/bfq-cgroup.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/block/bfq-cgroup.c b/block/bfq-cgroup.c
> > index 1b2829e99dad..d4e9428cdbe5 100644
> > --- a/block/bfq-cgroup.c
> > +++ b/block/bfq-cgroup.c
> > @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ struct bfq_group *bfq_bio_bfqg(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bio *bio)
> >   			continue;
> >   		}
> >   		bfqg = blkg_to_bfqg(blkg);
> > -		if (bfqg->online) {
> > +		if (bfqg && bfqg->online) {
> >   			bio_associate_blkg_from_css(bio, &blkg->blkcg->css);
> >   			return bfqg;
> >   		}
> > 

Sorry, forgot to mention, what behaviour was the same after we applied this patch. Issue
was resolved only when we added NULL checking for bfqg.

Thanks,
Artem