From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Sandeep Patil <sspatil@android.com>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] mm: security: introduce init_on_alloc=1 and init_on_free=1 boot options
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 11:11:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190621091159.GD3429@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAG_fn=UFj0Lzy3FgMV_JBKtxCiwE03HVxnR8=f9a7=4nrUFXSw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri 21-06-19 10:57:35, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 9:09 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
[...]
> > > diff --git a/kernel/kexec_core.c b/kernel/kexec_core.c
> > > index fd5c95ff9251..2f75dd0d0d81 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/kexec_core.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/kexec_core.c
> > > @@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ static struct page *kimage_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
> > > arch_kexec_post_alloc_pages(page_address(pages), count,
> > > gfp_mask);
> > >
> > > - if (gfp_mask & __GFP_ZERO)
> > > + if (want_init_on_alloc(gfp_mask))
> > > for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
> > > clear_highpage(pages + i);
> > > }
> >
> > I am not really sure I follow here. Why do we want to handle
> > want_init_on_alloc here? The allocated memory comes from the page
> > allocator and so it will get zeroed there. arch_kexec_post_alloc_pages
> > might touch the content there but is there any actual risk of any kind
> > of leak?
> You're right, we don't want to initialize this memory if init_on_alloc is on.
> We need something along the lines of:
> if (!static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_alloc))
> if (gfp_mask & __GFP_ZERO)
> // clear the pages
>
> Another option would be to disable initialization in alloc_pages() using a flag.
Or we can simply not care and keen the code the way it is. First of all
it seems that nobody actually does use __GFP_ZERO unless I have missed
soemthing
- kimage_alloc_pages(KEXEC_CONTROL_MEMORY_GFP, order); # GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NORETRY
- kimage_alloc_pages(gfp_mask, 0);
- kimage_alloc_page(image, GFP_KERNEL, KIMAGE_NO_DEST);
- kimage_alloc_page(image, GFP_HIGHUSER, maddr);
but even if we actually had a user do we care about double intialization
for something kexec related? It is not any hot path AFAIR.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-21 9:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-17 15:10 [PATCH v7 0/3] add init_on_alloc/init_on_free boot options Alexander Potapenko
2019-06-17 15:10 ` [PATCH v7 1/2] mm: security: introduce init_on_alloc=1 and init_on_free=1 " Alexander Potapenko
2019-06-17 22:10 ` Andrew Morton
2019-06-18 5:07 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-18 5:19 ` Andrew Morton
2019-06-18 5:26 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-21 7:09 ` Michal Hocko
2019-06-21 8:57 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-06-21 9:11 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-06-21 9:18 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-06-21 14:10 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-06-21 15:12 ` Michal Hocko
2019-06-21 15:24 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-06-21 15:54 ` Michal Hocko
2019-06-21 12:36 ` Qian Cai
2019-06-21 13:31 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-06-21 13:36 ` Qian Cai
2019-06-17 15:10 ` [PATCH v7 2/2] mm: init: report memory auto-initialization features at boot time Alexander Potapenko
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=20190621091159.GD3429@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=kcc@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=sspatil@android.com \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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).