From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:53151 "EHLO
	ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1422920AbcBZWID (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:08:03 -0500
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 22:07:59 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>,
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micka=EBl_Sala=FCn?= <mic@digikod.net>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: fs: NULL deref in atime_needs_update
Message-ID: <20160226220759.GH17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <1456283533.2933.20.camel@themaw.net>
 <20160224044628.GQ17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CACT4Y+bpoRyA+Puae7Tnbapur121UcnRtpckryEykowYfor31A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACT4Y+ZemyO==vojCFrP8nE=NAJ8ysz1J2SvCLc2yBF9M6=mqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACT4Y+Y6TpKD4pY9eGF-FFi6MHMNtBjnq-JeWLr+wVhDBP7Bfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160224151511.GR17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CACT4Y+amZqudFFpc5R_vd+G_6i1Tq8LDNvX_2qwjoiiTFO4DxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160225163927.GW17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20160226212137.GF17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CACT4Y+Z2RmFvtxdRY1=3h2sXMwmafFq+qgcZWGOoeZ79Yrwxzw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+Z2RmFvtxdRY1=3h2sXMwmafFq+qgcZWGOoeZ79Yrwxzw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:25:21PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 04:39:27PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> >> Hrm...  OK, seeing that you still seem to trigger those within an hour or
> >> two (and *any* of remaining WARN_ON() are serious bugs - none of the
> >> "mitigation had been triggered" remained, sorry for not making it clear),
> >> let's try this.  Again, any WARN_ON triggered means that we'd caught something,
> >> whether it progresses into oops or not.
> >
> > Any news on that one?  I'm going to carve fixes for understood bugs out of
> > that one and put those into tonight push, but it would be nice to sort out
> > all remaining crap lurking in that area...
> >
> > Another question: what about the very first trace you'd posted, with apparent
> > GPF at 00000050?  Have you seen anything like that afterwards?
> 
> No, I did not have time to retest.
> 
> GPF at 00000050 was not mine, it was Micka�l's.

Ah, OK - his is basically a forced nd->stack[] underrun, with passing a
never-assigned nd->link_inode to atime_needs_update(), so we are just
passing a contents of uninitialized stack word there and while it ends
up possible to dereference, it's not an address of struct inode and the
first attempt to follow a pointer in what would've been a struct inode
at that address (accessing inode->i_sb->s_flags) did blow up with GPF at
offsetof(struct super_block, s_flags).

All right, so we basically have several understood ones with fixes plus
something unknown that leads to lookup_fast() returning 0 with NULL in
*inode in about an hour or two on your setup...