Re: kvm: access to invalid memory in mmu_zap_unsync_children

[Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>]

On 01/16/2016 01:06 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 15/01/2016 17:54, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> While fuzzing with syzkaller on the latest -next kernel running on a KVM tools
>> guest, I've hit the following invalid memory access:
>>
>> [  547.956284] UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:2011:17
>>
>> [  547.956940] index 3 is out of range for type 'kvm_mmu_page *[3]'
>>
>> [  547.957567] CPU: 0 PID: 21577 Comm: syz-executor Tainted: G      D         4.4.0-next-20160114-sasha-00021-gf1273d1-dirty #2798
>>
>> [  547.958739]  1ffff1001819be5c 000000002fa0e55b ffff8800c0cdf360 ffffffff83433c4e
>>
>> [  547.972448]  0000000041b58ab3 ffffffff8f960c38 ffffffff83433b86 ffff8800c0cdf328
>>
>> [  547.973277]  0000000000000001 000000002fa0e55b ffffffff8feb8440 ffff8800c0cdf3f0
>>
>> [  547.974102] Call Trace:
>>
>> [  547.974424] dump_stack (lib/dump_stack.c:52)
>> [  547.975774] ubsan_epilogue (lib/ubsan.c:165)
>> [  547.976408] __ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds (lib/ubsan.c:382)
>> [  547.980877] mmu_zap_unsync_children (arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:2011 arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:2272)
>
> Marcelo/Takuya/Xiao,
>
> do you know what's the point in the assignment in kvm_mmu_pages_init?
>
> It seems to me that it should be
>
> 	parents->parent[0] = NULL;
>
> since the only user of the ->parent[] array, mmu_pages_clear_parents,
> walks the array up from parents->parent[0].
>

Yes, it is bugly and it surprised me that it was not triggered in nested env.

> Any other opinions?

The idea we use the array as [PT64_ROOT_LEVEL-1] is because we never take
the last level (level = 1) into account.

I think this diff can fix this, but it has not tested yet.

+#define INVALID_INDEX	(-1)
+
  static int mmu_unsync_walk(struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
  			   struct kvm_mmu_pages *pvec)
  {
  	if (!sp->unsync_children)
  		return 0;

-	mmu_pages_add(pvec, sp, 0);
+	/*
+	 * do not count the index in the parent of the sp we're
+	 * walking start from.
+	 */
+	mmu_pages_add(pvec, sp, INVALID_INDEX);
  	return __mmu_unsync_walk(sp, pvec);
  }

@@ -1980,8 +1986,11 @@ static int mmu_pages_next(struct kvm_mmu_pages *pvec,
  			return n;
  		}

-		parents->parent[sp->role.level-2] = sp;
-		parents->idx[sp->role.level-1] = pvec->page[n].idx;
+		parents->parent[sp->role.level - 2] = sp;
+
+		/* skip setting idex of the sp we start from. */
+		if (pvec->page[n].idx != INVALID_INDEX)
+			parents->idx[sp->role.level - 1] = pvec->page[n].idx;
  	}

  	return n;
@@ -1999,6 +2008,7 @@ static void mmu_pages_clear_parents(struct mmu_page_path *parents)
  		if (!sp)
  			return;

+		WARN_ON(idx != INVALID_INDEX);
  		clear_unsync_child_bit(sp, idx);
  		level++;
  	} while (level < PT64_ROOT_LEVEL-1 && !sp->unsync_children);
@@ -2008,7 +2018,7 @@ static void kvm_mmu_pages_init(struct kvm_mmu_page *parent,
  			       struct mmu_page_path *parents,
  			       struct kvm_mmu_pages *pvec)
  {
-	parents->parent[parent->role.level-1] = NULL;
+	parents->parent[parent->role.level - 2] = NULL;
  	pvec->nr = 0;
  }


>
> Paolo
>