linux-kernel - Re: cgroup null pointer dereference

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a5eac08e-bdb4-4aa2-bb46-aa89b6eb1871@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 17:26:04 -0400
From: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
To: Kamaljit Singh <Kamaljit.Singh1@....com>,
 "cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: cgroup null pointer dereference


On 4/23/25 1:30 PM, Kamaljit Singh wrote:
> Hello,
>
> While running IOs to an nvme fabrics target we're hitting this null pointer which causes
> CPU hard lockups and NMI. Before the lockups, the Medusa IOs ran successfully for ~23 hours.
>
> I did not find any panics listing nvme or block driver calls.
>
> RIP: 0010:cgroup_rstat_flush+0x1d0/0x750
> points to rstat.c, cgroup_rstat_push_children(), line 162 under second while() to the following code.
>
> 160                 /* updated_next is parent cgroup terminated */
> 161                 while (child != parent) {
> 162                         child->rstat_flush_next = head;
> 163                         head = child;
> 164                         crstatc = cgroup_rstat_cpu(child, cpu);
> 165                         grandchild = crstatc->updated_children;
>
> In my test env I've added a null check to 'child' and re-running the long-term test.
> I'm wondering if this patch is sufficient to address any underlying issue or is just a band-aid.
> Please share any known patches or suggestions.
>               -          while (child != parent) {
>               +         while (child && child != parent) {

Child can become NULL only if the updated_next list isn't parent 
terminated. This should not happen. A warning is needed if it really 
happens. I will take a further look to see if there is a bug somewhere.

Cheers,
Longman