linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm/rmap: fix potential out-of-bounds page table access during batched unmap

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: <CAGsJ_4xX+kW1msaXpEPqX7aQ-GYG9QVMo+JYBc18BfLCs8eFyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 19:36:57 +1200
From: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
To: Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, 
	chrisl@...nel.org, kasong@...cent.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, 
	ryan.roberts@....com, v-songbaohua@...o.com, x86@...nel.org, 
	huang.ying.caritas@...il.com, zhengtangquan@...o.com, riel@...riel.com, 
	Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, vbabka@...e.cz, harry.yoo@...cle.com, 
	mingzhe.yang@...com, stable@...r.kernel.org, Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm/rmap: fix potential out-of-bounds page table
 access during batched unmap

On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 7:15 PM Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2025/6/27 14:55, Barry Song wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 6:52 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 6:23 PM Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
> >>>
> >>> As pointed out by David[1], the batched unmap logic in try_to_unmap_one()
> >>> can read past the end of a PTE table if a large folio is mapped starting at
> >>> the last entry of that table. It would be quite rare in practice, as
> >>> MADV_FREE typically splits the large folio ;)
> >>>
> >>> So let's fix the potential out-of-bounds read by refactoring the logic into
> >>> a new helper, folio_unmap_pte_batch().
> >>>
> >>> The new helper now correctly calculates the safe number of pages to scan by
> >>> limiting the operation to the boundaries of the current VMA and the PTE
> >>> table.
> >>>
> >>> In addition, the "all-or-nothing" batching restriction is removed to
> >>> support partial batches. The reference counting is also cleaned up to use
> >>> folio_put_refs().
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/a694398c-9f03-4737-81b9-7e49c857fcbe@redhat.com
> >>>
> >>
> >> What about ?
> >>
> >> As pointed out by David[1], the batched unmap logic in try_to_unmap_one()
> >> may read past the end of a PTE table when a large folio spans across two PMDs,
> >> particularly after being remapped with mremap(). This patch fixes the
> >> potential out-of-bounds access by capping the batch at vm_end and the PMD
> >> boundary.
> >>
> >> It also refactors the logic into a new helper, folio_unmap_pte_batch(),
> >> which supports batching between 1 and folio_nr_pages. This improves code
> >> clarity. Note that such cases are rare in practice, as MADV_FREE typically
> >> splits large folios.
> >
> > Sorry, I meant that MADV_FREE typically splits large folios if the specified
> > range doesn't cover the entire folio.
>
> Hmm... I got it wrong as well :( It's the partial coverage that triggers
> the split.
>
> how about this revised version:
>
> As pointed out by David[1], the batched unmap logic in try_to_unmap_one()
> may read past the end of a PTE table when a large folio spans across two
> PMDs, particularly after being remapped with mremap(). This patch fixes
> the potential out-of-bounds access by capping the batch at vm_end and the
> PMD boundary.
>
> It also refactors the logic into a new helper, folio_unmap_pte_batch(),
> which supports batching between 1 and folio_nr_pages. This improves code
> clarity. Note that such boundary-straddling cases are rare in practice, as
> MADV_FREE will typically split a large folio if the advice range does not
> cover the entire folio.

I assume the out-of-bounds access must be fixed, even though it is very
unlikely. It might occur after a large folio is marked with MADV_FREE and
then remapped to an unaligned address, potentially crossing two PTE tables.

A batch size between 2 and nr_pages - 1 is practically rare, as we typically
split large folios when MADV_FREE does not cover the entire folio range.
Cases where a batch of size 2 or nr_pages - 1 occurs may only happen if a
large folio is partially unmapped after being marked MADV_FREE, which is
quite an unusual pattern in userspace.

Let's wait for David's feedback before preparing a new version :-)

Thanks
Barry