linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] static_call: Handle module init failure correctly in static_call_del

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: <ZvJomuNWjtHYDcsW@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 10:22:02 +0300
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
	Liu Shixin <liushixin2@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] static_call: Handle module init failure correctly in
 static_call_del_module()

On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 02:53:34AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 04:24:56PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 11:44:00AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Now you at least provided the information that the missing cleanup in
> > > the init() function is not the problem. So the obvious place to look is
> > > in the module core code whether there is a failure path _after_
> > > module->init() returned success.
> > > 
> > > do_init_module()
> > >         ret = do_one_initcall(mod->init);
> > >         ...
> > > 	ret = module_enable_rodata_ro(mod, true);
> > > 	if (ret)
> > > 		goto fail_mutex_unlock;
> > > 
> > > and that error path does _not_ invoke module->exit(), which is obviously
> > > not correct. Luis?
> > 
> > You're spot on this needs fixing.
> 
> Christophe, this is a regression caused by the second hunk of your commit
> d1909c0221739 ("module: Don't ignore errors from set_memory_XX()") on v6.9.
> Sadly there are a few issues with trying to get to call mod->exit():
> 
> - We should try try_stop_module()  and that can fail
> - source_list may not be empty and that would block removal
> - mod->exit may not exist
> 
> I'm wondering if instead we should try to do the module_enable_rodata_ro()
> before the init, but that requires a bit more careful evaluation...

There is ro_after_init section, we can't really make it RO before ->init()
 
>   Luis

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.