| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 14:59:48 +0200
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc: glider@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
jannh@...gle.com, sjpark@...zon.de, muchun.song@...ux.dev,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] mm: kfence: change kfence pool page layout
On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 11:58, 'Muchun Song' via kasan-dev
<kasan-dev@...glegroups.com> wrote:
>
> The original kfence pool layout (Given a layout with 2 objects):
>
> +------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
> | guard page | guard page | object | guard page | object | guard page |
> +------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
> | | |
> +----kfence_metadata[0]---+----kfence_metadata[1]---+
>
> The comment says "the additional page in the beginning gives us an even
> number of pages, which simplifies the mapping of address to metadata index".
>
> However, removing the additional page does not complicate any mapping
> calculations. So changing it to the new layout to save a page. And remmove
> the KFENCE_ERROR_INVALID test since we cannot test this case easily.
>
> The new kfence pool layout (Given a layout with 2 objects):
>
> +------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
> | guard page | object | guard page | object | guard page |
> +------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
> | | |
> +----kfence_metadata[0]---+----kfence_metadata[1]---+
>
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
> ---
> include/linux/kfence.h | 8 ++------
> mm/kfence/core.c | 40 ++++++++--------------------------------
> mm/kfence/kfence.h | 2 +-
> mm/kfence/kfence_test.c | 14 --------------
> 4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/kfence.h b/include/linux/kfence.h
> index 726857a4b680..25b13a892717 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kfence.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kfence.h
> @@ -19,12 +19,8 @@
>
> extern unsigned long kfence_sample_interval;
>
> -/*
> - * We allocate an even number of pages, as it simplifies calculations to map
> - * address to metadata indices; effectively, the very first page serves as an
> - * extended guard page, but otherwise has no special purpose.
> - */
> -#define KFENCE_POOL_SIZE ((CONFIG_KFENCE_NUM_OBJECTS + 1) * 2 * PAGE_SIZE)
> +/* The last page serves as an extended guard page. */
The last page is just a normal guard page? I.e. the last 2 pages are:
<object page> | <guard page>
Or did I misunderstand?
> +#define KFENCE_POOL_SIZE ((CONFIG_KFENCE_NUM_OBJECTS * 2 + 1) * PAGE_SIZE)
> extern char *__kfence_pool;
>
> DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(kfence_allocation_key);
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/core.c b/mm/kfence/core.c
> index 41befcb3b069..f205b860f460 100644
> --- a/mm/kfence/core.c
> +++ b/mm/kfence/core.c
> @@ -240,24 +240,7 @@ static inline void kfence_unprotect(unsigned long addr)
>
> static inline unsigned long metadata_to_pageaddr(const struct kfence_metadata *meta)
> {
> - unsigned long offset = (meta - kfence_metadata + 1) * PAGE_SIZE * 2;
> - unsigned long pageaddr = (unsigned long)&__kfence_pool[offset];
> -
> - /* The checks do not affect performance; only called from slow-paths. */
> -
> - /* Only call with a pointer into kfence_metadata. */
> - if (KFENCE_WARN_ON(meta < kfence_metadata ||
> - meta >= kfence_metadata + CONFIG_KFENCE_NUM_OBJECTS))
> - return 0;
Could we retain this WARN_ON? Or just get rid of
metadata_to_pageaddr() altogether, because there's only 1 use left and
the function would now just be a simple ALIGN_DOWN() anyway.
> - /*
> - * This metadata object only ever maps to 1 page; verify that the stored
> - * address is in the expected range.
> - */
> - if (KFENCE_WARN_ON(ALIGN_DOWN(meta->addr, PAGE_SIZE) != pageaddr))
> - return 0;
> -
> - return pageaddr;
> + return ALIGN_DOWN(meta->addr, PAGE_SIZE);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -535,34 +518,27 @@ static void kfence_init_pool(void)
> unsigned long addr = (unsigned long)__kfence_pool;
> int i;
>
> - /*
> - * Protect the first 2 pages. The first page is mostly unnecessary, and
> - * merely serves as an extended guard page. However, adding one
> - * additional page in the beginning gives us an even number of pages,
> - * which simplifies the mapping of address to metadata index.
> - */
> - for (i = 0; i < 2; i++, addr += PAGE_SIZE)
> - kfence_protect(addr);
> -
> for (i = 0; i < CONFIG_KFENCE_NUM_OBJECTS; i++, addr += 2 * PAGE_SIZE) {
> struct kfence_metadata *meta = &kfence_metadata[i];
> - struct slab *slab = page_slab(virt_to_page(addr));
> + struct slab *slab = page_slab(virt_to_page(addr + PAGE_SIZE));
>
> /* Initialize metadata. */
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&meta->list);
> raw_spin_lock_init(&meta->lock);
> meta->state = KFENCE_OBJECT_UNUSED;
> - meta->addr = addr; /* Initialize for validation in metadata_to_pageaddr(). */
> + meta->addr = addr + PAGE_SIZE;
> list_add_tail(&meta->list, &kfence_freelist);
>
> - /* Protect the right redzone. */
> - kfence_protect(addr + PAGE_SIZE);
> + /* Protect the left redzone. */
> + kfence_protect(addr);
>
> __folio_set_slab(slab_folio(slab));
> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> slab->memcg_data = (unsigned long)&meta->objcg | MEMCG_DATA_OBJCGS;
> #endif
> }
> +
> + kfence_protect(addr);
> }
>
> static bool __init kfence_init_pool_early(void)
> @@ -1043,7 +1019,7 @@ bool kfence_handle_page_fault(unsigned long addr, bool is_write, struct pt_regs
>
> atomic_long_inc(&counters[KFENCE_COUNTER_BUGS]);
>
> - if (page_index % 2) {
> + if (page_index % 2 == 0) {
> /* This is a redzone, report a buffer overflow. */
> struct kfence_metadata *meta;
> int distance = 0;
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/kfence.h b/mm/kfence/kfence.h
> index 600f2e2431d6..249d420100a7 100644
> --- a/mm/kfence/kfence.h
> +++ b/mm/kfence/kfence.h
> @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ static inline struct kfence_metadata *addr_to_metadata(unsigned long addr)
> * __kfence_pool, in which case we would report an "invalid access"
> * error.
> */
> - index = (addr - (unsigned long)__kfence_pool) / (PAGE_SIZE * 2) - 1;
> + index = (addr - (unsigned long)__kfence_pool) / (PAGE_SIZE * 2);
> if (index < 0 || index >= CONFIG_KFENCE_NUM_OBJECTS)
> return NULL;
Assume there is a right OOB that hit the last guard page. In this case
addr >= __kfence_pool + (NUM_OBJECTS * 2 * PAGE_SIZE) && addr <
__kfence_pool + POOL_SIZE
therefore
index >= (NUM_OBJECTS * 2 * PAGE_SIZE) / (PAGE_SIZE * 2) && index <
POOL_SIZE / (PAGE_SIZE * 2)
index == NUM_OBJECTS
And according to the above comparison, this will return NULL and
report KFENCE_ERROR_INVALID, which is wrong.
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c b/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> index b5d66a69200d..d479f9c8afb1 100644
> --- a/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> +++ b/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> @@ -637,19 +637,6 @@ static void test_gfpzero(struct kunit *test)
> KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, report_available());
> }
>
> -static void test_invalid_access(struct kunit *test)
> -{
> - const struct expect_report expect = {
> - .type = KFENCE_ERROR_INVALID,
> - .fn = test_invalid_access,
> - .addr = &__kfence_pool[10],
> - .is_write = false,
> - };
> -
> - READ_ONCE(__kfence_pool[10]);
> - KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, report_matches(&expect));
> -}
> -
> /* Test SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU works. */
> static void test_memcache_typesafe_by_rcu(struct kunit *test)
> {
> @@ -787,7 +774,6 @@ static struct kunit_case kfence_test_cases[] = {
> KUNIT_CASE(test_kmalloc_aligned_oob_write),
> KUNIT_CASE(test_shrink_memcache),
> KUNIT_CASE(test_memcache_ctor),
> - KUNIT_CASE(test_invalid_access),
The test can be retained by doing an access to a guard page in between
2 unallocated objects. But it's probably not that easy to reliably set
that up (could try to allocate 2 objects and see if they're next to
each other, then free them).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists