linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] crash: Fix crash memory reserve exceed system memory bug

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: <564e362d-5e8c-5d23-9c54-bfb811794169@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 11:24:21 +0800
From: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
CC: <vgoyal@...hat.com>, <dyoung@...hat.com>, <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
	<palmer@...belt.com>, <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, <rppt@...nel.org>,
	<kexec@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] crash: Fix crash memory reserve exceed system memory
 bug



On 2024/7/23 13:17, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 07/23/24 at 10:07am, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
>> On x86_32 Qemu machine with 1GB memory, the cmdline "crashkernel=4G" is ok
>> as below:
>> 	crashkernel reserved: 0x0000000020000000 - 0x0000000120000000 (4096 MB)
>>
>> It's similar on other architectures, such as ARM32 and RISCV32.
>>
>> The cause is that the crash_size is parsed and printed with "unsigned long
>> long" data type which is 8 bytes but allocated used with "phys_addr_t"
>> which is 4 bytes in memblock_phys_alloc_range().
>>
>> Fix it by checking if crash_size is greater than system RAM size and
>> return error if so.
>>
>> After this patch, there is no above confusing reserve success info.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
>> Suggested-by: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
>> Suggested-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
> 
> 
> My Suggested-by can be taken off because I suggested to check the parsed
> value after parse_crashkernel(), Mike's suggestion is better.

Hi, Can the suggested-by be removed when this version is merged, or a
new version needs to be sent?

> 
> For this version,
> 
> Acked-by: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
> 
>> ---
>> v5:
>> - Fix it in common parse_crashkernel() instead of per-arch.
>> - Add suggested-by.
>>
>> v4:
>> - Update the warn info to align with parse_crashkernel_mem().
>> - Rebased on the "ARM: Use generic interface to simplify crashkernel
>>   reservation" patch.
>> - Also fix for riscv32.
>> - Update the commit message.
>>
>> v3:
>> - Handle the check in reserve_crashkernel() Baoquan suggested.
>> - Split x86_32 and arm32.
>> - Add Suggested-by.
>> - Drop the wrong fix tag.
>>
>> v2:
>> - Also fix for x86_32.
>> - Update the fix method.
>> - Peel off the other two patches.
>> - Update the commit message.
>> ---
>>  kernel/crash_reserve.c | 3 +++
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/crash_reserve.c b/kernel/crash_reserve.c
>> index ad5b3f2c5487..5387269114f6 100644
>> --- a/kernel/crash_reserve.c
>> +++ b/kernel/crash_reserve.c
>> @@ -335,6 +335,9 @@ int __init parse_crashkernel(char *cmdline,
>>  	if (!*crash_size)
>>  		ret = -EINVAL;
>>  
>> +	if (*crash_size >= system_ram)
>> +		ret = -EINVAL;
>> +
>>  	return ret;
>>  }
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>
> 
>