linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] mm: Fix uprobe pte be overwritten when expanding vma

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: <6d7c2cd2-061e-4295-8e9a-832cd0185d8c@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 14:16:37 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: Pu Lehui <pulehui@...weicloud.com>, mhiramat@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com,
 peterz@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
 vbabka@...e.cz, jannh@...gle.com, pfalcato@...e.de, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, pulehui@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] mm: Fix uprobe pte be overwritten when expanding
 vma

On 02.06.25 19:01, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2025 at 06:28:58PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 02.06.25 15:26, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2025 at 02:26:21PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> On 02.06.25 13:55, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 08:51:14PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>>>>      	if (vp->remove) {
>>>>>>> @@ -1823,6 +1829,14 @@ struct vm_area_struct *copy_vma(struct vm_area_struct **vmap,
>>>>>>>      		faulted_in_anon_vma = false;
>>>>>>>      	}
>>>>>>> +	/*
>>>>>>> +	 * If the VMA we are copying might contain a uprobe PTE, ensure
>>>>>>> +	 * that we do not establish one upon merge. Otherwise, when mremap()
>>>>>>> +	 * moves page tables, it will orphan the newly created PTE.
>>>>>>> +	 */
>>>>>>> +	if (vma->vm_file)
>>>>>>> +		vmg.skip_vma_uprobe = true;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Assuming we extend the VMA on the way (not merge), would we handle that
>>>>>> properly?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or is that not possible on this code path or already broken either way?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure in what context you mean expand, vma_merge_new_range() calls
>>>>> vma_expand() so we call an expand a merge here, and this flag will be
>>>>> obeyed.
>>>>
>>>> Essentially, an mremap() that grows an existing mapping while moving it.
>>>>
>>>> Assume we have
>>>>
>>>> [ VMA 0 ] [ VMA X]
>>>>
>>>> And want to grow VMA 0 by 1 page.
>>>>
>>>> We cannot grow in-place, so we'll have to copy VMA 0 to another VMA, and
>>>> while at it, expand it by 1 page.
>>>>
>>>> expand_vma()->move_vma()->copy_vma_and_data()->copy_vma()
>>>
>>> OK so in that case you'd not have a merge at all, you'd have a new VMA and all
>>> would be well and beautiful :) or I mean hopefully. Maybe?
>>
>> I'm really not sure. :)
>>
>> Could there be some very odd cases like
>>
>> [VMA 0 ][ VMA 1 ][ VMA X]
>>
>> and when we mremap() [ VMA 1 ] to grow, we would place it before [VMA 0 ],
>> and just by pure lick end up merging with that if the ranges match?
> 
> When we invoke copy_vma() we pass vrm->new_addr and vrm->new_len so this would
> trigger a merge and the correct uprobe handling.
> 
> Since we just don't trigger the breakpoint install in this situation, we'd
> correctly move over the breakpoint to the right position, and overwrite anything
> we expanded into.
> 
> I do want to do a mremap doc actually to cover all the weird cases, because
> there's some weird stuff in there and it's worth covering off stuff for users
> and stuff for kernel people :)
> 
>>
>> We're in the corner cases now, ... so this might not be relevant. But I hope
>> we can clean up that uprobe mmap call later ...
> 
> Yeah with this initial fix in we can obviously revisit as needed!

As Andrew was asking off-list:

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>


:)

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb