netdev - Re: [PATCH mm] mm: fix BUG with kvzalloc+GFP

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: <Yy3GL12BOgp3wLjI@pc636>
Date:   Fri, 23 Sep 2022 16:43:59 +0200
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To:     Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, urezki@...il.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        Martin Zaharinov <micron10@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mm] mm: fix BUG with kvzalloc+GFP_ATOMIC

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 03:35:12PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> > On Fri 23-09-22 12:38:58, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > Martin Zaharinov reports BUG() in mm land for 5.19.10 kernel:
> > >  kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c:2437!
> > >  invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
> > >  CPU: 28 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/28 Tainted: G        W  O      5.19.9 #1
> > >  [..]
> > >  RIP: 0010:__get_vm_area_node+0x120/0x130
> > >   __vmalloc_node_range+0x96/0x1e0
> > >   kvmalloc_node+0x92/0xb0
> > >   bucket_table_alloc.isra.0+0x47/0x140
> > >   rhashtable_try_insert+0x3a4/0x440
> > >   rhashtable_insert_slow+0x1b/0x30
> > >  [..]
> > > 
> > > bucket_table_alloc uses kvzallocGPF_ATOMIC).  If kmalloc fails, this now
> > > falls through to vmalloc and hits code paths that assume GFP_KERNEL.
> > > 
> > > Revert the problematic change and stay with slab allocator.
> > 
> > Why don't you simply fix the caller?
> 
> Uh, not following?
> 
> kvzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) was perfectly fine, is this illegal again?
>
<snip>
static struct vm_struct *__get_vm_area_node(unsigned long size,
		unsigned long align, unsigned long shift, unsigned long flags,
		unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int node,
		gfp_t gfp_mask, const void *caller)
{
	struct vmap_area *va;
	struct vm_struct *area;
	unsigned long requested_size = size;

	BUG_ON(in_interrupt());
...
<snip>

vmalloc is not supposed to be called from the IRQ context. If it is possible
it would be better to fix the bucket_table_alloc() by not calling it from the
IRQ context.  

--
Uladzislau Rezki