From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] Memory compaction core
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:47:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100324214742.GL10659@random.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100324152854.48f72171@bike.lwn.net>
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 03:28:54PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:19:24 +0100
> Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > > > It's a bit strange to test this when we're about to oops anyway. The
> > > > oops will tell us the same thing.
> > >
> > > ...except that we've seen a fair number of null pointer dereference
> > > exploits that have told us something altogether different. Are we
> > > *sure* we don't want to test for null pointers...?
> >
> > Examples? Maybe WARN_ON != oops, but VM_BUG_ON still an oops that is
> > and without serial console it would go lost too. I personally don't
> > see how it's needed.
>
> I don't quite understand the question; are you asking for examples of
> exploits?
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/347006/
> http://lwn.net/Articles/360328/
> http://lwn.net/Articles/342330/
> ...
As far as I can tell, VM_BUG_ON would make _zero_ differences there.
I think you mistaken a VM_BUG_ON for a:
if (could_be_null->something) {
WARN_ON(1);
return -ESOMETHING;
}
adding a VM_BUG_ON(inode->something) would _still_ be as exploitable
as the null pointer deference, because it's a DoS. It's not really a
big deal of an exploit but it _sure_ need fixing.
The whole point is that VM_BUG_ON(!something) before something->else
won't move the needle as far as your null pointer deference exploits
are concerned.
> As to whether this particular test makes sense, I don't know. But the
> idea that we never need to test about-to-be-dereferenced pointers for
> NULL does worry me a bit.
Being worried is good idea, as we don't want DoS bugs ;). It's just
that VM_BUG_ON isn't a solution to the problem (and the really
important thing, it's not improving its detectability either), fixing
the actual bug is the solution.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-24 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-23 12:25 [PATCH 0/11] Memory Compaction v5 Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 01/11] mm,migration: Take a reference to the anon_vma before migrating Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 02/11] mm,migration: Do not try to migrate unmapped anonymous pages Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 17:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 18:04 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 03/11] mm: Share the anon_vma ref counts between KSM and page migration Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 17:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 23:55 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 04/11] Allow CONFIG_MIGRATION to be set without CONFIG_NUMA or memory hot-remove Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 05/11] Export unusable free space index via /proc/unusable_index Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 17:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 18:14 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 0:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-24 0:16 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 0:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-24 10:25 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 06/11] Export fragmentation index via /proc/extfrag_index Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 17:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 07/11] Memory compaction core Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 17:56 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 18:15 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 18:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 18:58 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 19:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-24 1:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-24 1:47 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 1:53 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-24 2:10 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 10:57 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 20:33 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-24 20:59 ` Jonathan Corbet
2010-03-24 21:14 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-24 21:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-24 21:19 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-03-24 21:28 ` Jonathan Corbet
2010-03-24 21:47 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2010-03-24 21:54 ` Jonathan Corbet
2010-03-24 22:06 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-03-24 21:57 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-03-25 9:13 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 08/11] Add /proc trigger for memory compaction Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 18:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 18:32 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 20:33 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-26 10:46 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 09/11] Add /sys trigger for per-node " Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 18:27 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 22:45 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 0:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 10/11] Direct compact when a high-order allocation fails Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 23:10 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 11:11 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 11:59 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 12:06 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 12:10 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 12:09 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 12:25 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-24 1:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-24 11:40 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-25 0:30 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-25 9:48 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-25 9:50 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-25 10:16 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-26 1:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-26 9:40 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 20:48 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-25 0:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-25 10:21 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 12:25 ` [PATCH 11/11] Do not compact within a preferred zone after a compaction failure Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 18:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-23 18:39 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 19:27 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-24 10:37 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 19:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-24 20:53 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-25 9:40 ` Mel Gorman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-12 16:41 [PATCH 0/11] Memory Compaction v4 Mel Gorman
2010-03-12 16:41 ` [PATCH 07/11] Memory compaction core Mel Gorman
2010-03-15 13:44 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-15 14:41 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-17 10:31 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-17 11:40 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-18 2:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-18 11:43 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-19 6:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-18 17:08 ` Mel Gorman
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=20100324214742.GL10659@random.random \
--to=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=agl@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).