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  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]
Date:   Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:45:38 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <>
To:     Cong Wang <>
Cc:     Coly Li <>,,,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <>,
        stable <>,
        LKML <>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <>,
        Christoph Hellwig <>, Hannes Reinecke <>,
        Jan Kara <>, Jens Axboe <>,
        Mikhail Skorzhinskii <>,
        Philipp Reisner <>,
        Sagi Grimberg <>,
        Vlastimil Babka <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] net: introduce helper sendpage_ok() in

On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 10:55:09AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 1:36 AM Coly Li <> wrote:
> >
> > The original problem was from nvme-over-tcp code, who mistakenly uses
> > kernel_sendpage() to send pages allocated by __get_free_pages() without
> > __GFP_COMP flag. Such pages don't have refcount (page_count is 0) on
> > tail pages, sending them by kernel_sendpage() may trigger a kernel panic
> > from a corrupted kernel heap, because these pages are incorrectly freed
> > in network stack as page_count 0 pages.
> >
> > This patch introduces a helper sendpage_ok(), it returns true if the
> > checking page,
> > - is not slab page: PageSlab(page) is false.
> > - has page refcount: page_count(page) is not zero
> >
> > All drivers who want to send page to remote end by kernel_sendpage()
> > may use this helper to check whether the page is OK. If the helper does
> > not return true, the driver should try other non sendpage method (e.g.
> > sock_no_sendpage()) to handle the page.
> Can we leave this helper to mm subsystem?
> I know it is for sendpage, but its implementation is all about some
> mm details and its two callers do not belong to net subsystem either.
> Think this in another way: who would fix it if it is buggy? I bet mm people
> should. ;)

No.  This is all about a really unusual imitation in sendpage, which
is pretty much unexpected.  In fact the best thing would be to make
sock_sendpage do the right thing and call sock_no_sendpage based
on this condition, so that driver writers don't have to worry at all.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists