[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANp29Y7mifrf-m0s+Sdj_UYm7Q4Rd+0Qci48oUOsH4KMwdjGcw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 18:19:06 +0100
From: Aleksandr Nogikh <nogikh@...gle.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+46423ed8fa1f1148c6e4@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jannh@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, vbabka@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [mm?] WARNING in vma_merge_existing_range
On Thu, Jan 2, 2025 at 11:26 AM 'Lorenzo Stoakes' via syzkaller-bugs
<syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Happy new year!
Happy New Year! :)
>
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 08:50:23PM -0800, syzbot wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > syzbot found the following issue on:
> >
> > HEAD commit: 8379578b11d5 Merge tag 'for-v6.13-rc' of git://git.kernel...
> > git tree: upstream
> > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=16113018580000
> > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=d269ef41b9262400
> > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=46423ed8fa1f1148c6e4
> > compiler: Debian clang version 15.0.6, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > userspace arch: i386
>
> Hmmmm 32-bit? But kernel reports give 64-bit registers? So I guess 32-bit
> userland, 64-bit kernel?
Yes, that's a 32-bit userspace binary running on a 64-bit kernel.
>
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this issue yet.
>
> Hmm. Racey thing?
>
> >
> > Downloadable assets:
> > disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/86d2e3352aff/disk-8379578b.raw.xz
> > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/345570cd3573/vmlinux-8379578b.xz
> > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/01da37a51505/bzImage-8379578b.xz
> >
> > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > Reported-by: syzbot+46423ed8fa1f1148c6e4@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> >
> > RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 0000000000000000
> > R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> > </TASK>
> > ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 20504 at mm/vma.c:734 vma_merge_existing_range+0x1145/0x16f0 mm/vma.c:734
>
> It'd be nice if syzbot could actually print the code that generates the
> warning :) a nice-to-have perhaps.
Thanks for the suggestion!
I've filed https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/5654
>
> This is:
>
> VM_WARN_ON(start >= end);
>
> I suspect start == end, because start > end would be some drastic and
> god-awful bug.
>
> > Modules linked in:
> > CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 20504 Comm: syz.6.5485 Not tainted 6.13.0-rc4-syzkaller-00069-g8379578b11d5 #0
> > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 09/13/2024
> > RIP: 0010:vma_merge_existing_range+0x1145/0x16f0 mm/vma.c:734
> > Code: e8 20 24 0f 00 4d 2b 7d 00 4d 89 ec 48 8b 7c 24 38 e9 7f 01 00 00 e8 3a bc a8 ff 90 0f 0b 90 e9 a8 f1 ff ff e8 2c bc a8 ff 90 <0f> 0b 90 e9 0e f2 ff ff e8 1e bc a8 ff 90 0f 0b 90 4d 85 ed 0f 85
>
> Be useful to get the kernel disassembly too :)
>
> Best guess wranging a python script and objdump:
>
> 0: e8 20 24 0f 00 call 0xf2425
> 5: 4d 2b 7d 00 sub 0x0(%r13),%r15
> 9: 4d 89 ec mov %r13,%r12
> c: 48 8b 7c 24 38 mov 0x38(%rsp),%rdi
> 11: e9 7f 01 00 00 jmp 0x195
> 16: e8 3a bc a8 ff call 0xffffffffffa8bc55
> 1b: 90 nop
> 1c: 0f 0b ud2
> 1e: 90 nop
> 1f: e9 a8 f1 ff ff jmp 0xfffffffffffff1cc
> 24: e8 2c bc a8 ff call 0xffffffffffa8bc55
> 29: 90 nop
> 2a: <0f> 0b ud2 <-- presumably here? This is an undefined instruction...
> 2c: 90 nop
> 2d: e9 0e f2 ff ff jmp 0xfffffffffffff240
> 32: e8 1e bc a8 ff call 0xffffffffffa8bc55
> 37: 90 nop
> 38: 0f 0b ud2
> 3a: 90 nop
> 3b: 4d 85 ed test %r13,%r13
> 3e: 0f .byte 0xf
> 3f: 85 .byte 0x85
>
> Yeah this might be a mix of data and code somehow or just garbage? Not sure
> there's anything discernable there unfortunately.
Syzbot also did some disassembly at the bottom of the report. I wonder
what's the difference between the two "Code" fields and if there's a
way to automatically select the right one for the disassembly.
>
> > RSP: 0018:ffffc9000ba274a0 EFLAGS: 00010293
> > RAX: ffffffff81f6b804 RBX: 0000000020c25000 RCX: ffff888060ad1e00
> > RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000020c25000 RDI: 0000000020c25000
> > RBP: ffffc9000ba275f8 R08: ffffffff81f6aa0d R09: 00000000280000fa
> > R10: ffffc9000ba27810 R11: fffff52001744f07 R12: 0000000020c25000
> > R13: ffff888069b666c8 R14: ffffc9000ba276a0 R15: ffff888068d0b1f0
> > FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8880b8700000(0063) knlGS:00000000f5116b40
> > CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 0000000080050033
> > CR2: 00007fa9de2c0018 CR3: 000000006b562000 CR4: 00000000003526f0
>
> > Call Trace:
> > <TASK>
> > vma_modify+0x41/0x330 mm/vma.c:1514
>
> Just passes through start, end (in vmg).
>
> > vma_modify_flags_name+0x3a6/0x430 mm/vma.c:1563
>
> Just passes through start, end.
>
> > madvise_update_vma+0x2fe/0xc10 mm/madvise.c:159
>
> Just passes through start, end.
>
> This means it was one of MADV_NORMAL, MADV_RANDOM, MADV_DONTFORK,
> MADV_DOFORK, MADV_WIPEONFORK, MADV_KEEPONFORK, MADV_DONTDUMP, MADV_DODUMP,
> MADV_MERGEABLE, MADV_UNMERGEABLE, MADV_HUGEPAGE, MADV_NOHUGEPAGE.
>
> Yeah we need better error handling here, because this report is just giving
> us very little to go on especially for a non-repro. Will add to TODO.
>
> > madvise_vma_behavior mm/madvise.c:1325 [inline]
>
> Just passes through start, end.
>
> > madvise_walk_vmas mm/madvise.c:1497 [inline]
>
> OK here we find VMAs and walk them.
>
> We explicitly check for start >= send if start < vma->vm_start.
>
> I wonder if the visit() call is splitting the VMA which confuses the logic
> here.
>
> s e
> | |
> v v
> |-------------|
> | |
> |-------------|
>
> Split:
>
> s e
> | |
> v v
> |--------|----|
> | | |
> |--------|----|
>
> prev = this VMA.
>
> if (prev && start < prev->vm_end)
> start = prev->vm_end;
>
> So we end up with:
>
>
> s,e
> |
> v
> |--------|----|
> | | |
> |--------|----|
>
> tmp = vma->vm_end;
> if (end < tmp)
> tmp = end;
>
> That tmp assignment will reinstate the broken end
>
> And... boom.
>
> Let me check this out and see if I can trigger it.
>
> I may be missing some safeguard that prevents this...
>
>
> > do_madvise+0x1e64/0x4d10 mm/madvise.c:1684
>
> Here we explicitly check for start >= end:
>
> end = start + len;
> if (end < start)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (end == start)
> return 0;
>
> So overflow is accounted for also. But since this is a 64-bit kernel not
> really a concern.
>
> > __do_sys_madvise mm/madvise.c:1700 [inline]
> > __se_sys_madvise mm/madvise.c:1698 [inline]
> > __ia32_sys_madvise+0xa6/0xc0 mm/madvise.c:1698
> > do_syscall_32_irqs_on arch/x86/entry/common.c:165 [inline]
> > __do_fast_syscall_32+0xb4/0x110 arch/x86/entry/common.c:386
> > do_fast_syscall_32+0x34/0x80 arch/x86/entry/common.c:411
> > entry_SYSENTER_compat_after_hwframe+0x84/0x8e
> > RIP: 0023:0xf7fc2579
> > Code: b8 01 10 06 03 74 b4 01 10 07 03 74 b0 01 10 08 03 74 d8 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 51 52 55 89 e5 0f 34 cd 80 <5d> 5a 59 c3 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
> > RSP: 002b:00000000f511655c EFLAGS: 00000206 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000db
> > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000020c00000 RCX: 0000000000400000
> > RDX: 000000000000000e RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000
> > RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 0000000000000000
> > R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> > </TASK>
> > ----------------
> > Code disassembly (best guess), 2 bytes skipped:
> > 0: 10 06 adc %al,(%rsi)
> > 2: 03 74 b4 01 add 0x1(%rsp,%rsi,4),%esi
> > 6: 10 07 adc %al,(%rdi)
> > 8: 03 74 b0 01 add 0x1(%rax,%rsi,4),%esi
> > c: 10 08 adc %cl,(%rax)
> > e: 03 74 d8 01 add 0x1(%rax,%rbx,8),%esi
> > 1e: 00 51 52 add %dl,0x52(%rcx)
> > 21: 55 push %rbp
> > 22: 89 e5 mov %esp,%ebp
> > 24: 0f 34 sysenter
> > 26: cd 80 int $0x80
> > * 28: 5d pop %rbp <-- trapping instruction
> > 29: 5a pop %rdx
> > 2a: 59 pop %rcx
> > 2b: c3 ret
> > 2c: 90 nop
> > 2d: 90 nop
> > 2e: 90 nop
> > 2f: 90 nop
> > 30: 90 nop
> > 31: 90 nop
> > 32: 90 nop
> > 33: 90 nop
> > 34: 90 nop
> > 35: 90 nop
> > 36: 90 nop
> > 37: 90 nop
> > 38: 90 nop
> > 39: 90 nop
> > 3a: 90 nop
> > 3b: 90 nop
> > 3c: 90 nop
> > 3d: 90 nop
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This report is generated by a bot. It may contain errors.
> > See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for more information about syzbot.
> > syzbot engineers can be reached at syzkaller@...glegroups.com.
> >
> > syzbot will keep track of this issue. See:
> > https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ#status for how to communicate with syzbot.
> >
> > If the report is already addressed, let syzbot know by replying with:
> > #syz fix: exact-commit-title
> >
> > If you want to overwrite report's subsystems, reply with:
> > #syz set subsystems: new-subsystem
> > (See the list of subsystem names on the web dashboard)
> >
> > If the report is a duplicate of another one, reply with:
> > #syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report
> >
> > If you want to undo deduplication, reply with:
> > #syz undup
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists