* [PATCH v3 0/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary @ 2026-09-10 3:42 Ren Wei 2026-09-10 3:42 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Ren Wei 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Ren Wei @ 2026-09-10 3:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-mm Cc: akpm, david, ljs, liam, vbabka, rppt, surenb, mhocko, notasas, vega, rakukuip, weir From: Luxiao Xu <rakukuip@gmail.com> Hi all, This patch addresses an issue in generic_access_phys() where accessing memory across page boundaries in PFNMAP VMAs assumes physical pages are contiguous, which can lead to accessing unintended physical memory or exceeding VMA boundaries. In v3, we address review feedback from David Hildenbrand on v2: 1. Revert changes to __access_remote_vm(): Capping the access length to (PAGE_SIZE - offset) inside generic_access_phys() is completely sufficient, as __access_remote_vm() already loops over the requested length and handles short transfers. 2. Drop the redundant 'len <= 0' check. 3. Add an explanatory comment clarifying that accesses are limited to one page at a time because follow_pfnmap_start() only validates a single PTE. 4. Regarding min() vs min_t(): min_t(int, ...) is retained because len is a signed int while PAGE_SIZE is unsigned long ((1UL) << PAGE_SHIFT), which triggers a compile-time "signedness error" if plain min() is used. Thanks for the reviews and guidance. v2 -> v3: - Drop modification to __access_remote_vm(); capping in generic_access_phys() is sufficient because the caller loop already handles partial transfers (David Hildenbrand). - Drop unnecessary 'len <= 0' check. - Add comment explaining the single-page limitation (David Hildenbrand). - v2 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1788531737.git.rakukuip@gmail.com/ v1 -> v2: - Drop internal multi-page loop in generic_access_phys(); clamp the chunk size leveraging the existing caller loop (David Hildenbrand). - Map only PAGE_SIZE in generic_access_phys(). - Add missing (resource_size_t) cast when checking args.pfn (Andrew Morton). Luxiao Xu (1): mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary mm/memory.c | 10 ++++++++-- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) -- 2.43.0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 1/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary 2026-09-10 3:42 [PATCH v3 0/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary Ren Wei @ 2026-09-10 3:42 ` Ren Wei 2026-09-10 6:18 ` Andrew Morton 2026-09-10 8:16 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Ren Wei @ 2026-09-10 3:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-mm Cc: akpm, david, ljs, liam, vbabka, rppt, surenb, mhocko, notasas, vega, rakukuip, weir From: Luxiao Xu <rakukuip@gmail.com> generic_access_phys() improperly validates the memory access range: it only validates the start address using follow_pfnmap_start() and passes PAGE_ALIGN(len + offset) to ioremap_prot(). This poses two problems: 1. In PFNMAP VMAs, consecutive virtual pages are not guaranteed to be physically contiguous, and individual PTEs may have different access permissions or writability. 2. The mapping may cross VMA boundaries if len extends beyond vma->vm_end. Constrain the access in generic_access_phys() to at most the current page boundary (PAGE_SIZE - offset) and map only a single PAGE_SIZE via ioremap_prot(). Since the caller __access_remote_vm() already loops over the requested length and handles partial transfers, it will naturally iterate over the remaining pages. Also add a missing (resource_size_t) cast during PFN re-validation to avoid truncation on 32-bit PAE systems. Fixes: 9cb12d7b4cca ("mm/memory.c: actually remap enough memory") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Reported-by: Vega <vega@nebusec.ai> Assisted-by: LLM Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Luxiao Xu <rakukuip@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ren Wei <weir@nebusec.ai> --- v2 -> v3: - Do not modify __access_remote_vm(); capping in generic_access_phys() is sufficient because the caller loop already handles partial transfers (David Hildenbrand). - Drop unnecessary 'len <= 0' check. - Add comment explaining the single-page limitation (David Hildenbrand). - v2 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1788531737.git.rakukuip@gmail.com/ v1 -> v2: - Drop internal multi-page loop in generic_access_phys(); clamp the chunk size leveraging the existing caller loop (David Hildenbrand). - Map only PAGE_SIZE in generic_access_phys(). - Add missing (resource_size_t) cast when checking args.pfn (Andrew Morton). --- mm/memory.c | 10 ++++++++-- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c index ff338c2abe92..74fdf29c9c7e 100644 --- a/mm/memory.c +++ b/mm/memory.c @@ -6974,6 +6974,12 @@ int generic_access_phys(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, bool writable; struct follow_pfnmap_args args = { .vma = vma, .address = addr }; + /* + * Limit access to one page at a time, as that's what follow_pfnmap_start() + * guarantees; expect the caller to retry to read larger ranges. + */ + len = min_t(int, len, PAGE_SIZE - offset); + retry: if (follow_pfnmap_start(&args)) return -EINVAL; @@ -6985,7 +6991,7 @@ int generic_access_phys(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, if ((write & FOLL_WRITE) && !writable) return -EINVAL; - maddr = ioremap_prot(phys_addr, PAGE_ALIGN(len + offset), prot); + maddr = ioremap_prot(phys_addr, PAGE_SIZE, prot); if (!maddr) return -ENOMEM; @@ -6993,7 +6999,7 @@ int generic_access_phys(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, goto out_unmap; if ((pgprot_val(prot) != pgprot_val(args.pgprot)) || - (phys_addr != (args.pfn << PAGE_SHIFT)) || + (phys_addr != ((resource_size_t)args.pfn << PAGE_SHIFT)) || (writable != args.writable)) { follow_pfnmap_end(&args); iounmap(maddr); -- 2.43.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary 2026-09-10 3:42 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Ren Wei @ 2026-09-10 6:18 ` Andrew Morton 2026-09-13 8:28 ` Yuan Tan 2026-09-10 8:16 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2026-09-10 6:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ren Wei Cc: linux-mm, david, ljs, liam, vbabka, rppt, surenb, mhocko, notasas, vega, rakukuip On Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:42:50 +0800 Ren Wei <weir@nebusec.ai> wrote: > From: Luxiao Xu <rakukuip@gmail.com> > > generic_access_phys() improperly validates the memory access range: it > only validates the start address using follow_pfnmap_start() and passes > PAGE_ALIGN(len + offset) to ioremap_prot(). > > This poses two problems: > 1. In PFNMAP VMAs, consecutive virtual pages are not guaranteed to be > physically contiguous, and individual PTEs may have different access > permissions or writability. > 2. The mapping may cross VMA boundaries if len extends beyond vma->vm_end. > > Constrain the access in generic_access_phys() to at most the current page > boundary (PAGE_SIZE - offset) and map only a single PAGE_SIZE via > ioremap_prot(). Since the caller __access_remote_vm() already loops over > the requested length and handles partial transfers, it will naturally > iterate over the remaining pages. > > Also add a missing (resource_size_t) cast during PFN re-validation to avoid > truncation on 32-bit PAE systems. Thanks. When fixing a bug, please ensure that the changelog always clearly describes the userspace-visible runtime effects of that bug. > Fixes: 9cb12d7b4cca ("mm/memory.c: actually remap enough memory") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Especially when proposing a backport. The cover letter tells us a bit more: This patch addresses an issue in generic_access_phys() where accessing memory across page boundaries in PFNMAP VMAs assumes physical pages are contiguous, which can lead to accessing unintended physical memory or exceeding VMA boundaries. But how does this manifest? What does the user see? Has it ever happened? Is there a Closes:? Any reproducer? > Reported-by: Vega <vega@nebusec.ai> > Assisted-by: LLM Please update your LLM prompts with my above sentence "When fixing...". Let's get this fixed for the future. > + len = min_t(int, len, PAGE_SIZE - offset); > - (phys_addr != (args.pfn << PAGE_SHIFT)) || > + (phys_addr != ((resource_size_t)args.pfn << PAGE_SHIFT)) || hoo boy we've made a mess of the types in there, but I don't see a feasible improvement in the context of this patch. Also, a [0/N] isn't needed or desirable when N==1! I'll consolidate both into a singleton patch. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary 2026-09-10 6:18 ` Andrew Morton @ 2026-09-13 8:28 ` Yuan Tan 2026-09-13 22:47 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Yuan Tan @ 2026-09-13 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm, david, ljs, liam, vbabka, rppt, surenb, mhocko, notasas, rakukuip, david, Ren Wei On 9/9/26 23:18, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:42:50 +0800 Ren Wei <weir@nebusec.ai> wrote: > >> From: Luxiao Xu <rakukuip@gmail.com> >> >> generic_access_phys() improperly validates the memory access range: it >> only validates the start address using follow_pfnmap_start() and passes >> PAGE_ALIGN(len + offset) to ioremap_prot(). >> >> This poses two problems: >> 1. In PFNMAP VMAs, consecutive virtual pages are not guaranteed to be >> physically contiguous, and individual PTEs may have different access >> permissions or writability. >> 2. The mapping may cross VMA boundaries if len extends beyond vma->vm_end. >> >> Constrain the access in generic_access_phys() to at most the current page >> boundary (PAGE_SIZE - offset) and map only a single PAGE_SIZE via >> ioremap_prot(). Since the caller __access_remote_vm() already loops over >> the requested length and handles partial transfers, it will naturally >> iterate over the remaining pages. >> >> Also add a missing (resource_size_t) cast during PFN re-validation to avoid >> truncation on 32-bit PAE systems. > Thanks. > > When fixing a bug, please ensure that the changelog always clearly > describes the userspace-visible runtime effects of that bug. > >> Fixes: 9cb12d7b4cca ("mm/memory.c: actually remap enough memory") >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Especially when proposing a backport. > > The cover letter tells us a bit more: > > This patch addresses an issue in generic_access_phys() where > accessing memory across page boundaries in PFNMAP VMAs assumes > physical pages are contiguous, which can lead to accessing unintended > physical memory or exceeding VMA boundaries. > > But how does this manifest? What does the user see? Has it ever > happened? Is there a Closes:? Any reproducer? > >> Reported-by: Vega <vega@nebusec.ai> >> Assisted-by: LLM > Please update your LLM prompts with my above sentence "When fixing...". > Let's get this fixed for the future. > >> + len = min_t(int, len, PAGE_SIZE - offset); >> - (phys_addr != (args.pfn << PAGE_SHIFT)) || >> + (phys_addr != ((resource_size_t)args.pfn << PAGE_SHIFT)) || > hoo boy we've made a mess of the types in there, but I don't see a > feasible improvement in the context of this patch. > > Also, a [0/N] isn't needed or desirable when N==1! I'll consolidate > both into a singleton patch. Hi, Luxiao is helping us fix some of the bugs found by our bug finding tool. Normally, our patch series includes a reproducer in the cover letter, so we usually send these patches with a cover letter. I believe Luxiao simply forgot to include the reproducer in this version. The reproducer for this bug can be found here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1784428532.git.rakukuip@gmail.com/ For future patches, if we are sending a single patch without a cover letter, what would be the preferred way to include the reproducer? Should we put it directly in the commit message, or place it below the --- separator so that the reproducer itself does not become part of the permanent git history? Also, I have been collecting the bug report by llm into a syzbot-like tracking system[1]. The tracker aggregates bug reports from multiple sources, including Sashiko, and then attempts to validate the reports and generate reproducers to make sure it is not a false positive . It also automatically tracks whether a bug has been fixed. For the networking side, I have already imported the Sashiko reports into the bug tracker and shared it with the net maintainers. I am planning to do the same for mm, but haven't gotten to it yet. There are already a few mm bugs in the tracker that were found by our own tool, and none of them seem to have security implications. If you have a chance, I'd be interested to hear what you think. Any suggestions on how to make it more useful for mm maintainers would be very welcome. Thanks, Yuan [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260830115546.3942129-1-yuantan098@gmail.com/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary 2026-09-13 8:28 ` Yuan Tan @ 2026-09-13 22:47 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2026-09-13 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yuan Tan Cc: linux-mm, david, ljs, liam, vbabka, rppt, surenb, mhocko, notasas, rakukuip, Ren Wei On Sun, 13 Sep 2026 01:28:18 -0700 Yuan Tan <yuant@nebusec.ai> wrote: > > >> + (phys_addr != ((resource_size_t)args.pfn << PAGE_SHIFT)) || > > hoo boy we've made a mess of the types in there, but I don't see a > > feasible improvement in the context of this patch. > > > > Also, a [0/N] isn't needed or desirable when N==1! I'll consolidate > > both into a singleton patch. > > Hi, > > > Luxiao is helping us fix some of the bugs found by our bug finding tool. > > > Normally, our patch series includes a reproducer in the cover letter, so > we usually send these patches with a cover letter. I believe Luxiao > simply forgot to include the reproducer in this version. The reproducer > for this bug can be found here: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1784428532.git.rakukuip@gmail.com/ Great, thanks. See, what I'm always looking for in bug fixes is a solid description of the significance/impact/risk which that bug has upon our users. This impact ranges between "Impossibly improbable thing which some AI scan found but which nobody is ever going to hit" through to "this crashes our entire fleet 12 times per day". The range really is that broad and this information matters. And people care about it. I look to authors to help us understand and assess this impact. So please do whatever you can (organization-wide) to ensure that this info is made available to its potential audience. > For future patches, if we are sending a single patch without a cover > letter, what would be the preferred way to include the reproducer? > Should we put it directly in the commit message, or place it below the > --- separator so that the reproducer itself does not become part of the > permanent git history? It depends. Formally, the reproducer should be made part of selftests/, so the bug can never reappear. I think that's excessive for this project and the risk of reintroduction is so low that this isn't worthwhile. Pasting it in to the formal changelog is reasonable. Putting it below the --- is probably better, as long as the permanent changelog mentions its existence. Then highly motivated people can follow the Link: and find the reproducer. The main value in the reproducer is knowing that it exists! That this bug can really be hit from userspace. > > Also, I have been collecting the bug report by llm into a syzbot-like > tracking system[1]. > The tracker aggregates bug reports from multiple sources, including > Sashiko, and then attempts to validate the reports and generate > reproducers to make sure it is not a false positive . It also > automatically tracks whether a bug has been fixed. That's a great initiative, thanks. > > For the networking side, I have already imported the Sashiko reports > into the bug tracker and shared it with the net maintainers. I am > planning to do the same for mm, but haven't gotten to it yet. There are > already a few mm bugs in the tracker that were found by our own tool, > and none of them seem to have security implications. > > If you have a chance, I'd be interested to hear what you think. Any > suggestions on how to make it more useful for mm maintainers would be > very welcome. I saw. I'd love to spend time with this but you know how it is. We're all overwhelmed by the bot invasion at present, and none more than me. I view your contributions as "parallelization of effort". Keep the fixes coming and I'll do my best to get them through our pipeline and out to our users. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary 2026-09-10 3:42 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Ren Wei 2026-09-10 6:18 ` Andrew Morton @ 2026-09-10 8:16 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: David Hildenbrand (Arm) @ 2026-09-10 8:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ren Wei, linux-mm Cc: akpm, ljs, liam, vbabka, rppt, surenb, mhocko, notasas, vega, rakukuip On 9/10/26 05:42, Ren Wei wrote: > From: Luxiao Xu <rakukuip@gmail.com> > > generic_access_phys() improperly validates the memory access range: it > only validates the start address using follow_pfnmap_start() and passes > PAGE_ALIGN(len + offset) to ioremap_prot(). > > This poses two problems: > 1. In PFNMAP VMAs, consecutive virtual pages are not guaranteed to be > physically contiguous, and individual PTEs may have different access > permissions or writability. > 2. The mapping may cross VMA boundaries if len extends beyond vma->vm_end. > > Constrain the access in generic_access_phys() to at most the current page > boundary (PAGE_SIZE - offset) and map only a single PAGE_SIZE via > ioremap_prot(). Since the caller __access_remote_vm() already loops over > the requested length and handles partial transfers, it will naturally > iterate over the remaining pages. > > Also add a missing (resource_size_t) cast during PFN re-validation to avoid > truncation on 32-bit PAE systems. > > Fixes: 9cb12d7b4cca ("mm/memory.c: actually remap enough memory") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Reported-by: Vega <vega@nebusec.ai> > Assisted-by: LLM > Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Luxiao Xu <rakukuip@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Ren Wei <weir@nebusec.ai> > --- Yes, LGTM! Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org> -- Cheers, David ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-09-13 22:47 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-09-10 3:42 [PATCH v3 0/1] mm/memory: constrain generic_access_phys() to page boundary Ren Wei 2026-09-10 3:42 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Ren Wei 2026-09-10 6:18 ` Andrew Morton 2026-09-13 8:28 ` Yuan Tan 2026-09-13 22:47 ` Andrew Morton 2026-09-10 8:16 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox