Re: mm: NULL ptr deref handling mmaping of special mappings

Pavel Emelyanov
2014-05-19T08:27:41Z

On 05/15/2014 11:42 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On May 14, 2014 8:36 PM, "Pavel Emelyanov" <xemul@parallels.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 05/15/2014 02:23 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 02:33:54PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Andrew Morton
>>>>> <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 14 May 2014 17:11:00 -0400 Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In my linux-next all that code got deleted by Andy's "x86, vdso:
>>>>>>>> Reimplement vdso.so preparation in build-time C" anyway. What kernel
>>>>>>>> were you looking at?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Deleted? It appears in today's -next. arch/x86/vdso/vma.c:124 .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't see Andy's patch removing that code either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ah, OK, it got moved from arch/x86/vdso/vdso32-setup.c into
>>>>>> arch/x86/vdso/vma.c.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe you managed to take a fault against the symbol area between the
>>>>>> _install_special_mapping() and the remap_pfn_range() call, but mmap_sem
>>>>>> should prevent that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or the remap_pfn_range() call never happened. Should map_vdso() be
>>>>>> running _install_special_mapping() at all if
>>>>>> image->sym_vvar_page==NULL?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm confused: are we talking about 3.15-rcsomething or linux-next?
>>>>> That code changed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would this all make more sense if there were just a single vma in
>>>>> here? cc: Pavel and Cyrill, who might have to deal with this stuff in
>>>>> CRIU
>>>>
>>>> Well, for criu we've not modified any vdso kernel's code (except
>>>> setting VM_SOFTDIRTY for this vdso VMA in _install_special_mapping).
>>>> And never experienced problems Sasha points. Looks like indeed in
>>>> -next code is pretty different from mainline one. To figure out
>>>> why I need to fetch -next branch and get some research. I would
>>>> try to do that tomorrow (still hoping someone more experienced
>>>> in mm system would beat me on that).
>>>
>>> I can summarize:
>>>
>>> On 3.14 and before, the vdso is just a bunch of ELF headers and
>>> executable data. When executed by 64-bit binaries, it reads from the
>>> fixmap to do its thing. That is, it reads from kernel addresses that
>>> don't have vmas. When executed by 32-bit binaries, it doesn't read
>>> anything, since there was no 32-bit timing code.
>>>
>>> On 3.15, the x86_64 vdso is unchanged. The 32-bit vdso is preceded by
>>> a separate vma containing two pages worth of time-varying read-only
>>> data. The vdso reads those pages using PIC references.
>>>
>>> On linux-next, all vdsos work the same way. There are two vmas. The
>>> first vma is executable text, which can be poked at by ptrace, etc
>>> normally. The second vma contains time-varying state, should not
>>> allow poking, and is accessed by PIC references.
>>
>> Is this 2nd vma seen in /proc/pid/maps? And if so, is it marked somehow?
>
> It is in maps, and it's not marked. I can write a patch to change
> that. I imagine it shouldn't be called [vdso], though.

That would be great.

>>
>>> What does CRIU do to restore the vdso? Will 3.15 and/or linux-next
>>> need to make some concession for CRIU?
>>
>> We detect the vdso by "[vdso]" mark in proc at dump time and mark it in
>> the images. At restore time we check that vdso symbols layout hasn't changed
>> and just remap it in proper location.
>>
>> If this remains the same in -next, then we're fine :)
>
> If you just remap the vdso, you'll crash.
>
> This is the case in 3.15, too, for 32-bit apps, anyway.
>
> What happens if you try to checkpoint a program that's in the vdso or,
> worse, in a signal frame with the vdso on the stack?

Nothing good, unfortunately :( And this is one of the things we're investigating.
Cyrill can shed more light on it, as he's the one in charge.

> --Andy