linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: list_lru: Fix NULL pointer dereference in list_lru

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: <io2g62bk243qo4jzjrkqr5gko5fykrji2xmqeahxnhma53giaz@3li2ozvsbjim>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 22:30:17 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Youling Tang <youling.tang@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Youling Tang <tangyouling@...inos.cn>, 
	Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: list_lru: Fix NULL pointer dereference in
 list_lru_add()

On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 10:28:33AM GMT, Youling Tang wrote:
> Hi, Kent
> 
> On 12/07/2024 23:49, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 12:28:57PM GMT, Youling Tang wrote:
> > > Hi, Kent
> > > 
> > > On 12/07/2024 12:07, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 11:25:54AM GMT, Youling Tang wrote:
> > > > > From: Youling Tang <tangyouling@...inos.cn>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Note that list_lru_from_memcg_idx() may return NULL, so it is necessary
> > > > > to error handle the return value to avoid triggering NULL pointer
> > > > > dereference BUG.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The issue was triggered for discussion [1],
> > > > > Link [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bcachefs/84de6cb1-57bd-42f7-8029-4203820ef0b4@linux.dev/T/#m901bb26cdb1d9d4bacebf0d034f0a5a712cc93a6
> > > > I see no explanation for why this is the correct fix, and I doubt it is.
> > > > What's the real reason for the NULL lru_list_one, and why doesn't this
> > > > come up on other filesystems?
> > > We can break it down into two questions (independent of each other):
> > > 1) Error handling is necessary when l (lru_list_one) is NULL here.
> > No, you're just hiding the actual bug - since I wasn't clear, I'm naking
> > this patch.
> We should use kmem_cache_alloc_lru() instead of kmem_cache_alloc(),
> similar to the [1] modification.
> 
> Apply the following patch to fix the problem:

Thanks, send it as a proper patch and I'll apply it

> 
> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/fs.c b/fs/bcachefs/fs.c
> index f9c9a95d7d4c..79a580dfb5e1 100644
> --- a/fs/bcachefs/fs.c
> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/fs.c
> @@ -227,7 +227,8 @@ static struct inode *bch2_alloc_inode(struct super_block
> *sb)
> 
>  static struct bch_inode_info *__bch2_new_inode(struct bch_fs *c)
>  {
> -       struct bch_inode_info *inode = kmem_cache_alloc(bch2_inode_cache,
> GFP_NOFS);
> +       struct bch_inode_info *inode = alloc_inode_sb(c->vfs_sb,
> bch2_inode_cache, GFP_NOFS);
>         if (!inode)
>                 return NULL;
> 
> Link [1]: https://lwn.net/ml/linux-kernel/20220228122126.37293-5-songmuchun@bytedance.com/
> 
> Thanks,
> Youling.