linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill

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: <d957454e-6516-f7e5-57fb-63f4687325ed@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:51:44 +0800
From: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
To: <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <tytso@....edu>, <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, <jack@...e.cz>,
	<ritesh.list@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<yi.zhang@...wei.com>, <yangerkun@...wei.com>, <yukuai3@...wei.com>, Baokun
 Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in
 __ext4_fill_super()

A gentle ping.

On 2024/1/2 21:37, Baokun Li wrote:
> In the following concurrency we will access the uninitialized rs->lock:
>
> ext4_fill_super
>    ext4_register_sysfs
>     // sysfs registered msg_ratelimit_interval_ms
>                               // Other processes modify rs->interval to
>                               // non-zero via msg_ratelimit_interval_ms
>    ext4_orphan_cleanup
>      ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "Errors on filesystem, "
>        __ext4_msg
>          ___ratelimit(&(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_msg_ratelimit_state)
>            if (!rs->interval)  // do nothing if interval is 0
>              return 1;
>            raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(&rs->lock, flags)
>              raw_spin_trylock(lock)
>                _raw_spin_trylock
>                  __raw_spin_trylock
>                    spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_)
>                      lock_acquire
>                        __lock_acquire
>                          register_lock_class
>                            assign_lock_key
>                              dump_stack();
>    ratelimit_state_init(&sbi->s_msg_ratelimit_state, 5 * HZ, 10);
>      raw_spin_lock_init(&rs->lock);
>      // init rs->lock here
>
> and get the following dump_stack:
>
> =========================================================
> INFO: trying to register non-static key.
> The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe
> you didn't initialize this object before use?
> turning off the locking correctness validator.
> CPU: 12 PID: 753 Comm: mount Tainted: G E 6.7.0-rc6-next-20231222 #504
> [...]
> Call Trace:
>   dump_stack_lvl+0xc5/0x170
>   dump_stack+0x18/0x30
>   register_lock_class+0x740/0x7c0
>   __lock_acquire+0x69/0x13a0
>   lock_acquire+0x120/0x450
>   _raw_spin_trylock+0x98/0xd0
>   ___ratelimit+0xf6/0x220
>   __ext4_msg+0x7f/0x160 [ext4]
>   ext4_orphan_cleanup+0x665/0x740 [ext4]
>   __ext4_fill_super+0x21ea/0x2b10 [ext4]
>   ext4_fill_super+0x14d/0x360 [ext4]
> [...]
> =========================================================
>
> Normally interval is 0 until s_msg_ratelimit_state is initialized, so
> ___ratelimit() does nothing. But registering sysfs precedes initializing
> rs->lock, so it is possible to change rs->interval to a non-zero value
> via the msg_ratelimit_interval_ms interface of sysfs while rs->lock is
> uninitialized, and then a call to ext4_msg triggers the problem by
> accessing an uninitialized rs->lock. Therefore register sysfs after all
> initializations are complete to avoid such problems.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
> ---
>   fs/ext4/super.c | 22 ++++++++++------------
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c
> index 0980845c8b8f..1db23b0e8a4f 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
> @@ -5564,19 +5564,15 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>   	if (err)
>   		goto failed_mount6;
>   
> -	err = ext4_register_sysfs(sb);
> -	if (err)
> -		goto failed_mount7;
> -
>   	err = ext4_init_orphan_info(sb);
>   	if (err)
> -		goto failed_mount8;
> +		goto failed_mount7;
>   #ifdef CONFIG_QUOTA
>   	/* Enable quota usage during mount. */
>   	if (ext4_has_feature_quota(sb) && !sb_rdonly(sb)) {
>   		err = ext4_enable_quotas(sb);
>   		if (err)
> -			goto failed_mount9;
> +			goto failed_mount8;
>   	}
>   #endif  /* CONFIG_QUOTA */
>   
> @@ -5602,7 +5598,7 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>   		ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "recovery complete");
>   		err = ext4_mark_recovery_complete(sb, es);
>   		if (err)
> -			goto failed_mount10;
> +			goto failed_mount9;
>   	}
>   
>   	if (test_opt(sb, DISCARD) && !bdev_max_discard_sectors(sb->s_bdev))
> @@ -5619,15 +5615,17 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>   	atomic_set(&sbi->s_warning_count, 0);
>   	atomic_set(&sbi->s_msg_count, 0);
>   
> +	/* Register sysfs after all initializations are complete. */
> +	err = ext4_register_sysfs(sb);
> +	if (err)
> +		goto failed_mount9;
> +
>   	return 0;
>   
> -failed_mount10:
> +failed_mount9:
>   	ext4_quotas_off(sb, EXT4_MAXQUOTAS);
> -failed_mount9: __maybe_unused
> +failed_mount8: __maybe_unused
>   	ext4_release_orphan_info(sb);
> -failed_mount8:
> -	ext4_unregister_sysfs(sb);
> -	kobject_put(&sbi->s_kobj);
>   failed_mount7:
>   	ext4_unregister_li_request(sb);
>   failed_mount6: