linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm/userfaultfd: Fix uninitialized output field for -EAGAIN race

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: <CADrL8HW--e8GVe+6aW7ZvDEBBDHp3cBC9Tcs_6duOJ5H+ZWNpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:07:31 -0400
From: James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, 
	Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm/userfaultfd: Fix uninitialized output field for
 -EAGAIN race

On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 11:58 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 25.04.25 17:45, James Houghton wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 5:57 PM Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> When discussing some userfaultfd issues with Andrea, Andrea pointed out an
> >> ABI issue with userfaultfd that existed for years.  Luckily the issue
> >> should only be a very corner case one, and the fix (even if changing the
> >> kernel ABI) should only be in the good way, IOW there should have no risk
> >> breaking any userapp but only fixing.
> >
> > FWIW, my userspace basically looks like this:
> >
> > struct uffdio_continue uffdio_continue;
> > int64_t target_len = /* whatever */;
> > int64_t bytes_mapped = 0;
> > int ioctl_ret;
> > do {
> >    uffdio_continue.range = /* whatever */;
> >    uffdio_continue.mapped = 0;
> >    ioctl_ret = ioctl(uffd, UFFDIO_CONTINUE, &uffdio_continue);
> >    if (uffdio_continue.mapped < 0) { break; }
> >    bytes_mapped += uffdio_continue.mapped;
> > } while (bytes_mapped < target_len && errno == EAGAIN);
> >
> > I think your patch would indeed break this. (Perhaps I shouldn't be
> > reading from `mapped` without first checking that errno == EAGAIN.)
> >
> > Well, that's what I would say, except in practice I never actually hit
> > the mmap_changing case while invoking UFFDIO_CONTINUE. :)
>
> Hm, but what if mfill_atomic_continue() would already return -EAGAIN
> when checking mmap_changing etc?
>
> Wouldn't code already run into an issue there?

Ah, thanks David. You're right, my code is already broken! :(

So given that we already have a case where -EAGAIN is put in the
output field, I change my mind, let's keep putting -EAGAIN in the
output field, and I'll go fix my code.