linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 1/3] ACPI: APEI: send SIGBUS to current task if synchronous memory error not recovered

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: <D3YEWCUXEWY3.ALFECJPKZMMG@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 17:14:54 +0300
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Shuai Xue" <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>, <bp@...en8.de>,
 <rafael@...nel.org>, <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>,
 <mawupeng1@...wei.com>, <tony.luck@...el.com>, <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
 <naoya.horiguchi@....com>, <james.morse@....com>, <tongtiangen@...wei.com>,
 <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <will@...nel.org>
Cc: <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>, <x86@...nel.org>, <justin.he@....com>,
 <ardb@...nel.org>, <ying.huang@...el.com>, <ashish.kalra@....com>,
 <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
 <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <lenb@...nel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>,
 <robert.moore@...el.com>, <lvying6@...wei.com>, <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>,
 <zhuo.song@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 1/3] ACPI: APEI: send SIGBUS to current task if
 synchronous memory error not recovered

On Thu Sep 5, 2024 at 6:04 AM EEST, Shuai Xue wrote:
>
>
> 在 2024/9/4 00:09, Jarkko Sakkinen 写道:
> > On Mon Sep 2, 2024 at 6:00 AM EEST, Shuai Xue wrote:
> >> Synchronous error was detected as a result of user-space process accessing
> >> a 2-bit uncorrected error. The CPU will take a synchronous error exception
> >> such as Synchronous External Abort (SEA) on Arm64. The kernel will queue a
> >> memory_failure() work which poisons the related page, unmaps the page, and
> >> then sends a SIGBUS to the process, so that a system wide panic can be
> >> avoided.
> >>
> >> However, no memory_failure() work will be queued unless all bellow
> >> preconditions check passed:
> >>
> >> - `if (!(mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_PA))` in ghes_handle_memory_failure()
> >> - `if (flags == -1)` in ghes_handle_memory_failure()
> >> - `if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_MEMORY_FAILURE))` in ghes_do_memory_failure()
> >> - `if (!pfn_valid(pfn) && !arch_is_platform_page(physical_addr)) ` in ghes_do_memory_failure()
> >>
> >> In such case, the user-space process will trigger SEA again.  This loop
> >> can potentially exceed the platform firmware threshold or even trigger a
> >> kernel hard lockup, leading to a system reboot.
> >>
> >> Fix it by performing a force kill if no memory_failure() work is queued
> >> for synchronous errors.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>
> >>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 10 ++++++++++
> >>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> >> index 623cc0cb4a65..b0b20ee533d9 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> >> @@ -801,6 +801,16 @@ static bool ghes_do_proc(struct ghes *ghes,
> >>   		}
> >>   	}
> >>   
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * If no memory failure work is queued for abnormal synchronous
> >> +	 * errors, do a force kill.
> >> +	 */
> >> +	if (sync && !queued) {
> >> +		pr_err("Sending SIGBUS to %s:%d due to hardware memory corruption\n",
> >> +			current->comm, task_pid_nr(current));
> > 
> > Hmm... doest this need "hardware" or would "memory corruption" be
> > enough?
> > 
> > Also, does this need to say that it is sending SIGBUS when the signal
> > itself tells that already?
> > 
> > I.e. could "%s:%d has memory corruption" be enough information?
>
> Hi, Jarkko,
>
> Thank you for your suggestion. Maybe it could.
>
> There are some similar error info which use "hardware memory error", e.g.

By tweaking my original suggestion just a bit:

"%s:%d: hardware memory corruption"

Can't get clearer than that, right?

BR, Jarkko