Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix a UAF when inode item push

[Long Li <leo.lilong@huawei.com>]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 09:20:29PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 10:29:41AM +0800, Long Li wrote:
> > KASAN reported a UAF bug while fault injection test:
> > 
> >   ==================================================================
> >   BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in xfs_inode_item_push+0x2db/0x2f0
> >   Read of size 8 at addr ffff888022f74788 by task xfsaild/sda/479
> > 
> >   CPU: 0 PID: 479 Comm: xfsaild/sda Not tainted 6.2.0-rc7-00003-ga8a43e2eb5f6 #89
> >   Call Trace:
> >    <TASK>
> >    dump_stack_lvl+0x51/0x6a
> >    print_report+0x171/0x4a6
> >    kasan_report+0xb7/0x130
> >    xfs_inode_item_push+0x2db/0x2f0
> >    xfsaild+0x729/0x1f70
> >    kthread+0x290/0x340
> >    ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> >    </TASK>
> > 
> >   Allocated by task 494:
> >    kasan_save_stack+0x22/0x40
> >    kasan_set_track+0x25/0x30
> >    __kasan_slab_alloc+0x58/0x70
> >    kmem_cache_alloc+0x197/0x5d0
> >    xfs_inode_item_init+0x62/0x170
> >    xfs_trans_ijoin+0x15e/0x240
> >    xfs_init_new_inode+0x573/0x1820
> >    xfs_create+0x6a1/0x1020
> >    xfs_generic_create+0x544/0x5d0
> >    vfs_mkdir+0x5d0/0x980
> >    do_mkdirat+0x14e/0x220
> >    __x64_sys_mkdir+0x6a/0x80
> >    do_syscall_64+0x39/0x80
> >    entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
> > 
> >   Freed by task 14:
> >    kasan_save_stack+0x22/0x40
> >    kasan_set_track+0x25/0x30
> >    kasan_save_free_info+0x2e/0x40
> >    __kasan_slab_free+0x114/0x1b0
> >    kmem_cache_free+0xee/0x4e0
> >    xfs_inode_free_callback+0x187/0x2a0
> >    rcu_do_batch+0x317/0xce0
> >    rcu_core+0x686/0xa90
> >    __do_softirq+0x1b6/0x626
> > 
> >   The buggy address belongs to the object at ffff888022f74758
> >    which belongs to the cache xfs_ili of size 200
> >   The buggy address is located 48 bytes inside of
> >    200-byte region [ffff888022f74758, ffff888022f74820)
> > 
> >   The buggy address belongs to the physical page:
> >   page:ffffea00008bdd00 refcount:1 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x22f74
> >   head:ffffea00008bdd00 order:1 compound_mapcount:0 subpages_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0
> >   flags: 0x1fffff80010200(slab|head|node=0|zone=1|lastcpupid=0x1fffff)
> >   raw: 001fffff80010200 ffff888010ed4040 ffffea00008b2510 ffffea00008bde10
> >   raw: 0000000000000000 00000000001a001a 00000001ffffffff 0000000000000000
> >   page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected
> > 
> >   Memory state around the buggy address:
> >    ffff888022f74680: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 fc fc fc
> >    ffff888022f74700: fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fa fb fb fb fb
> >   >ffff888022f74780: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb
> >                         ^
> >    ffff888022f74800: fb fb fb fb fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc
> >    ffff888022f74880: fc fc 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> >   ==================================================================
> > 
> > When reclaim inodes, it will race with inode item push if log is shutdown.
> > Consider the following call graph, xfs_inode and xfs_inode_log_item may
> > be freed after release bp, threefore, the lip cannot be accessed after this.
> > 
> >   CPU0					CPU1
> >   xfs_inode_item_push			xfs_reclaim_inode
> >   -------------------			-----------------
> >   xfs_buf_trylock(bp)
> >   spin_unlock(&lip->li_ailp->ail_lock)
> >   xfs_buf_relse(bp)
> >   					xfs_buf_lock(bp)
> >   					spin_lock(&ailp->ail_lock)
> >   					spin_unlock(&ailp->ail_lock)
> >   					xfs_buf_relse(bp)
> > 					__xfs_inode_free(ip)
> >   spin_lock(&lip->li_ailp->ail_lock)
> > 
> > Fixes: 90c60e164012 ("xfs: xfs_iflush() is no longer necessary")
> > Signed-off-by: Long Li <leo.lilong@huawei.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_inode_item.c | 5 +++--
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_item.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_item.c
> > index ca2941ab6cbc..52895e51fac5 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_item.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_item.c
> > @@ -545,6 +545,7 @@ xfs_inode_item_push(
> >  	struct xfs_inode_log_item *iip = INODE_ITEM(lip);
> >  	struct xfs_inode	*ip = iip->ili_inode;
> >  	struct xfs_buf		*bp = lip->li_buf;
> > +	struct xfs_ail		*ailp = lip->li_ailp;
> >  	uint			rval = XFS_ITEM_SUCCESS;
> >  	int			error;
> >  
> > @@ -567,7 +568,7 @@ xfs_inode_item_push(
> >  	if (!xfs_buf_trylock(bp))
> >  		return XFS_ITEM_LOCKED;
> >  
> > -	spin_unlock(&lip->li_ailp->ail_lock);
> > +	spin_unlock(&ailp->ail_lock);
> >  
> >  	/*
> >  	 * We need to hold a reference for flushing the cluster buffer as it may
> > @@ -591,7 +592,7 @@ xfs_inode_item_push(
> >  		rval = XFS_ITEM_LOCKED;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	spin_lock(&lip->li_ailp->ail_lock);
> > +	spin_lock(&ailp->ail_lock);
> 
> So what you're saying here is that once we release the buffer, it's
> possible that the log item can get released too?  And now the spin_lock
> call walks off the (now released) log item?

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

> 
> Do dquot log items suffer from the same problem?

dquot log items looks different, it has dqp->q_qlock protect.
> 
> --D
> 
> >  	return rval;
> >  }
> >  
> > -- 
> > 2.31.1
> >