From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2701A6B016B for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 00:29:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E547E32.4030001@hitachi.com> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:29:38 +0900 From: HAYASAKA Mitsuo MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3] avoid null pointer access in vm_struct References: <20110821082132.28358.72280.stgit@ltc219.sdl.hitachi.co.jp> <20110822152505.22b58998.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20110822152505.22b58998.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, KOSAKI Motohiro , yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com, David Rientjes , Namhyung Kim , "Paul E. McKenney" , Jeremy Fitzhardinge Hi Andrew, (2011/08/23 7:25), Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 17:21:32 +0900 > Mitsuo Hayasaka wrote: > >> The /proc/vmallocinfo shows information about vmalloc allocations in vmlist >> that is a linklist of vm_struct. It, however, may access pages field of >> vm_struct where a page was not allocated. This results in a null pointer >> access and leads to a kernel panic. >> >> Why this happen: >> In __vmalloc_node_range() called from vmalloc(), newly allocated vm_struct >> is added to vmlist at __get_vm_area_node() and then, some fields of >> vm_struct such as nr_pages and pages are set at __vmalloc_area_node(). In >> other words, it is added to vmlist before it is fully initialized. At the >> same time, when the /proc/vmallocinfo is read, it accesses the pages field >> of vm_struct according to the nr_pages field at show_numa_info(). Thus, a >> null pointer access happens. >> >> Patch: >> This patch adds newly allocated vm_struct to the vmlist *after* it is fully >> initialized. So, it can avoid accessing the pages field with unallocated >> page when show_numa_info() is called. > > Seems rather ugly, but I guess it's OK. vmalloc() is "special" in that > it fills the area with allocated pages, whereas all the > get_vm_area()-type callers don't do that. > >> >> ... >> >> @@ -1381,17 +1403,20 @@ struct vm_struct *remove_vm_area(const void *addr) >> va = find_vmap_area((unsigned long)addr); >> if (va && va->flags & VM_VM_AREA) { >> struct vm_struct *vm = va->private; >> - struct vm_struct *tmp, **p; >> - /* >> - * remove from list and disallow access to this vm_struct >> - * before unmap. (address range confliction is maintained by >> - * vmap.) >> - */ >> - write_lock(&vmlist_lock); >> - for (p = &vmlist; (tmp = *p) != vm; p = &tmp->next) >> - ; >> - *p = tmp->next; >> - write_unlock(&vmlist_lock); >> + >> + if (!(vm->flags & VM_UNLIST)) { >> + struct vm_struct *tmp, **p; >> + /* >> + * remove from list and disallow access to >> + * this vm_struct before unmap. (address range >> + * confliction is maintained by vmap.) >> + */ >> + write_lock(&vmlist_lock); >> + for (p = &vmlist; (tmp = *p) != vm; p = &tmp->next) >> + ; >> + *p = tmp->next; >> + write_unlock(&vmlist_lock); >> + } > > Is this needed? How can remove_vm_area() actually be called with a > VM_UNLIST area? > Yes, it is needed because this patch does not add the newly allocated vm_struct to vmlist at __get_vm_area_node(). So, revove_vm_area() with unlisted vm_struct will be called when an error occurs within __vmalloc_area_node(). > > I think I'll let this patch cook in linux-next for a while and shall > tag it for backporting into 3.1.x later on. > I see, thank you. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org