From: Xinyu Zheng <zhengxinyu6@huawei.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Zhangjiaji <zhangjiaji1@huawei.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Wangqinxiao (Tom)" <wangqinxiao@huawei.com>,
zhangyashu <zhangyashu2@h-partners.com>,
"wangyanan (Y)" <wangyanan55@huawei.com>,
zouyipeng <zouyipeng@huawei.com>, <wangyanan55@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG REPORT] USE_AFTER_FREE in complete_emulated_mmio found by KASAN/Syzkaller fuzz test (v5.10.0)
Date: Fri, 8 May 2026 15:57:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41da263a-ca8e-4041-8214-b6b9f80edebb@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aZYneb7Dvuu-HQsP@google.com>
On 2/19/2026 4:56 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026, Zhangjiaji wrote:
>>>> I think there's a not-completely-awful solution buried in this gigantic cesspool.
>>>> The only time KVM uses on-stack variables is for qword or smaller accesses, i.e.
>>>> 8 bytes in size or less. For larger fragments, e.g. AVX to/from MMIO, the target
>>>> value will always be an operand in the emulator context. And so rather than
>>>> disallow stack variables, for "small" fragments, we can rework the handling to
>>>> copy the value to/from each fragment on-demand instead of stashing a pointer to
>>>> the value.
>>>
>>> Since we can store the frag->val in struct kvm_mmio_fragment,
>>> why not just point frag->data to it? This Way we can save a lot code about
>>> (frag->data == NULL).
>>
>> It's not quite that simple, because we need to handle reads as well.
>>
>>> Though this patch will block any read-into-stack calls, we can add a special path
>>> in function emulator_read_write handling feasible read-into-stack calls -- the
>>> target is released just after emulator_read_write returns.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 9 ++++++++-
>>> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 3 ++-
>>> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> index 72d37c8930ad..12d53d441a39 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> @@ -8197,7 +8197,14 @@ static int emulator_read_write_onepage(unsigned long addr, void *val,
>>> WARN_ON(vcpu->mmio_nr_fragments >= KVM_MAX_MMIO_FRAGMENTS);
>>> frag = &vcpu->mmio_fragments[vcpu->mmio_nr_fragments++];
>>> frag->gpa = gpa;
>>> - frag->data = val;
>>> + if (bytes > 8u || ! write) {
>>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(object_is_on_stack(val)))
>>
>> This is user-triggerable, e.g. em_popa(), em_pop_sreg(), emulate_iret_real(),
>> em_ret_near_imm(), em_ret_far(), and em_ret().
>
> *sigh*
>
> And I was wrong. I finally sat down to write some comments for all of this, and
> realized that reads _never_ pass an on-stack @val to emulator_read_write_onepage(),
> because read_emulated() always buffers reads through ctxt->mem_read.
>
> So not only is my fancy, complex code unnecessary, it's actively broken. If a
> read splits a page boundary, and the first page is NOT emulated MMIO, trying to
> fulfill the read on-demand falls apart because the @val points at the start of
> the operand (technically its cache "entry"). I'm sure that's a solvable problem,
> but I don't see any point in manufacturing a problem in the first place.
>
> I need to write a changelog, but as Yashu suggested, the fix can more simply be:
>
> --
> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2026 09:45:37 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH 01/14] KVM: x86: Use scratch field in MMIO fragment to hold
> small write values
>
> Fixes: f78146b0f923 ("KVM: Fix page-crossing MMIO")
> Suggested-by: Yashu Zhang <zhangjiaji1@huawei.com>
> Reported-by: Yashu Zhang <zhangjiaji1@huawei.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/369eaaa2b3c1425c85e8477066391bc7@huawei.com
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 3 ++-
> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index db3f393192d9..ff3a6f86973f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -8226,7 +8226,13 @@ static int emulator_read_write_onepage(unsigned long addr, void *val,
> WARN_ON(vcpu->mmio_nr_fragments >= KVM_MAX_MMIO_FRAGMENTS);
> frag = &vcpu->mmio_fragments[vcpu->mmio_nr_fragments++];
> frag->gpa = gpa;
> - frag->data = val;
> + if (write && bytes <= 8u) {
> + frag->val = 0;
> + frag->data = &frag->val;
> + memcpy(&frag->val, val, bytes);
> + } else {
> + frag->data = val;
> + }
> frag->len = bytes;
> return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
> }
> @@ -8241,6 +8247,9 @@ static int emulator_read_write(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
> gpa_t gpa;
> int rc;
>
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE((bytes > 8u || !ops->write) && object_is_on_stack(val)))
> + return X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
> +
> if (ops->read_write_prepare &&
> ops->read_write_prepare(vcpu, val, bytes))
> return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
> @@ -11847,6 +11856,9 @@ static int complete_emulated_mmio(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> frag++;
> vcpu->mmio_cur_fragment++;
> } else {
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(frag->data == &frag->val))
> + return -EIO;
> +
> /* Go forward to the next mmio piece. */
> frag->data += len;
> frag->gpa += len;
> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> index 2c7d76262898..0bb2a34fb93d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> @@ -320,7 +320,8 @@ static inline bool kvm_vcpu_can_poll(ktime_t cur, ktime_t stop)
> struct kvm_mmio_fragment {
> gpa_t gpa;
> void *data;
> - unsigned len;
> + u64 val;
Hi, Jiayi and Sean,
Since I met a KABI consistence break problem from this change, I am
finding a way to avoid add including kvm_mmio_fragment.val.
Can I try to directly malloc a 8 size buffer for kvm_mmio_fragment.data
instead of using kvm_mmio_fragment.val, and free this buffer in
complete_emulated_mmio when all fragments is been copied?
Thanks!
> + unsigned int len;
> };
>
> struct kvm_vcpu {
>
> base-commit: 183bb0ce8c77b0fd1fb25874112bc8751a461e49
> --
--
Xinyu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-08 7:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-10 11:56 Re: [BUG REPORT] USE_AFTER_FREE in complete_emulated_mmio found by KASAN/Syzkaller fuzz test (v5.10.0) Zhangjiaji
2026-02-10 19:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-02-18 20:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-05-08 7:57 ` Xinyu Zheng [this message]
2026-05-08 14:25 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-05-09 1:55 ` Xinyu
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-02-02 1:24 Zhangjiaji
2026-02-06 23:30 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-02-09 20:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-02-10 6:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2026-02-10 14:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-02-10 17:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=41da263a-ca8e-4041-8214-b6b9f80edebb@huawei.com \
--to=zhengxinyu6@huawei.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=wangqinxiao@huawei.com \
--cc=wangyanan55@huawei.com \
--cc=zhangjiaji1@huawei.com \
--cc=zhangyashu2@h-partners.com \
--cc=zouyipeng@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox