netdev - Re: [net/bpf] 3051bf36c2 BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 0000a7cf

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: <7af7bcc9-9115-be9f-2240-a022487e9b70@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Mar 2017 15:55:39 -0800
From:   Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@...org>,
        ast@...com, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [net/bpf] 3051bf36c2 BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request
 at 0000a7cf

On 03/08/2017 02:36 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>> [   28.474232] rodata_test: test data was not read only
>> [...]
> 
> In my tests so far, I've never been able to get rodata_test to fail
> (Qemu 2.5.0, Ubuntu). I'll retry with your .config and see if I can
> recheck under Qemu 2.7.1. Do you see these failures on real hardware?
> 
> -Kees
> 

FWIW, I'm seeing the same issue with qemu 2.6.2 and 2.8.0 on Fedora 24
and rawhide respectively. 

I also notice that CONFIG_X86_PAE is turned off in the defconfig. If
I set CONFIG_HIGHMEM_64G which turns on CONFIG_X86_PAE the problem
goes away. I can't tell if this is an indication of magically hiding
the TLB problem or if there is an issue with !X86_PAE invalidation.


Thanks,
Laura