linux-kernel - Re: [linux-next:master] [x86/module] 6661cae1aa: WARNING:at_arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c:#__cpa_process

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: <fa91d82c-1b7b-46ab-ab8d-0161b08e29a9@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 08:27:36 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev,
 lkp@...el.com, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
 Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Brian Cain <bcain@...cinc.com>,
 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
 Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
 Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Dinh Nguyen
 <dinguyen@...nel.org>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
 Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
 Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
 Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>,
 "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
 Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
 Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
 Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
 Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
 Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
 Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-next:master] [x86/module] 6661cae1aa:
 WARNING:at_arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c:#__cpa_process_fault

On 10/13/24 01:17, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 09:30:33AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 10/11/24 08:40, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 07:00:01AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>>> On 10/11/24 06:08, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>>>> This patch disables ROX caches on 32-bit, it should fix the issue.
>>>> While I'm not going to shed a tear for 32-bit, what's the actual
>>>> compatibility issue with 32-bit?
>>> From the stack trace it looks like execmem tries to update the direct map
>>> for highmem memory, and cpa is not happy about it.
>>
>> First of all, if it's a highmem problem, shouldn't the check be for
>> CONFIG_HIGHMEM and not on 32-bit vs. 64-bit?  We do have non-highmem
>> 32-bit configs.
> 
> 32 bit also does not have ARCH_HUGE_VMALLOC and execmem cache will be
> anyway populated with 4k pages, so I don't see why it would be useful on 32
> bit all.

It's not really about making it _available_ to 32-bit, but making sure
that we're actually doing the check against the right feature and in the
right way.

To me, it seems like execmem itself should be excluding all HIGHMEM=y
builds or _maybe_ all 32-bit builds because execmem has the built-in
assumption that vmalloc memory is in the direct map.

That seems preferable to sticking a 32-bit (or highmem) check in all the
architectures.

This code:

> +static int execmem_set_direct_map_valid(struct vm_struct *vm, bool valid)
> +{
> +	unsigned int nr = (1 << get_vm_area_page_order(vm));
> +	unsigned int updated = 0;
> +	int err = 0;
> +
> +	for (int i = 0; i < vm->nr_pages; i += nr) {
> +		err = set_direct_map_valid_noflush(vm->pages[i], nr, valid);

seems arguably buggy (or at least potentially fragile) since it
implicitly assumes that vmalloc'd memory has a spot in the direct map.
The "this architecture and config has a direct map for all pages"
assumption is not clear here at all.

>> Also, where did the highmem come from?  All of the execmem allocations
>> look like they're some variant of PAGE_KERNEL, but no __GFP_HIGHMEM.
> 
> Despite that execmem allocations are PAGE_KERNEL, __vmalloc_area_node()
> implicitly adds __GFP_HIGHMEM for !DMA allocations.

Ahh, I missed that bit.  Thanks for the explanation.