From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: akash.goel@intel.com, ajd@linux.ibm.com,
Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>,
syzbot+1e925b4b836afe85a1c6@syzkaller-ppc64.appspotmail.com,
syzbot+587b2421926808309d21@syzkaller-ppc64.appspotmail.com,
syzbot+58320b7171734bf79d26@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
syzbot+d6074fb08bdb2e010520@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] relay: handle alloc_percpu returning NULL in relay_open
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 15:59:27 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d0dbffbk.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191129013745.7168-1-dja@axtens.net>
Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net> writes:
> alloc_percpu() may return NULL, which means chan->buf may be set to
> NULL. In that case, when we do *per_cpu_ptr(chan->buf, ...), we
> dereference an invalid pointer:
>
> BUG: Unable to handle kernel data access at 0x7dae0000
> Faulting instruction address: 0xc0000000003f3fec
> ...
> NIP [c0000000003f3fec] relay_open+0x29c/0x600
> LR [c0000000003f3fc0] relay_open+0x270/0x600
> Call Trace:
> [c000000054353a70] [c0000000003f3fb4] relay_open+0x264/0x600 (unreliable)
> [c000000054353b00] [c000000000451764] __blk_trace_setup+0x254/0x600
> [c000000054353bb0] [c000000000451b78] blk_trace_setup+0x68/0xa0
> [c000000054353c10] [c0000000010da77c] sg_ioctl+0x7bc/0x2e80
> [c000000054353cd0] [c000000000758cbc] do_vfs_ioctl+0x13c/0x1300
> [c000000054353d90] [c000000000759f14] ksys_ioctl+0x94/0x130
> [c000000054353de0] [c000000000759ff8] sys_ioctl+0x48/0xb0
> [c000000054353e20] [c00000000000bcd0] system_call+0x5c/0x68
>
> Check if alloc_percpu returns NULL. Because we can readily catch and
> handle this situation, switch to alloc_cpu_gfp and pass in __GFP_NOWARN.
>
> This was found by syzkaller both on x86 and powerpc, and the reproducer
> it found on powerpc is capable of hitting the issue as an unprivileged
> user.
>
> Fixes: 017c59c042d0 ("relay: Use per CPU constructs for the relay channel buffer pointers")
> Reported-by: syzbot+1e925b4b836afe85a1c6@syzkaller-ppc64.appspotmail.com
> Reported-by: syzbot+587b2421926808309d21@syzkaller-ppc64.appspotmail.com
> Reported-by: syzbot+58320b7171734bf79d26@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Reported-by: syzbot+d6074fb08bdb2e010520@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Cc: Akash Goel <akash.goel@intel.com>
> Cc: Andrew Donnellan <ajd@linux.ibm.com> # syzkaller-ppc64
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.10+
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
...
> diff --git a/kernel/relay.c b/kernel/relay.c
> index ade14fb7ce2e..a376cc6b54ec 100644
> --- a/kernel/relay.c
> +++ b/kernel/relay.c
> @@ -580,7 +580,13 @@ struct rchan *relay_open(const char *base_filename,
> if (!chan)
> return NULL;
>
> - chan->buf = alloc_percpu(struct rchan_buf *);
> + chan->buf = alloc_percpu_gfp(struct rchan_buf *,
> + GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
> + if (!chan->buf) {
> + kfree(chan);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> chan->version = RELAYFS_CHANNEL_VERSION;
> chan->n_subbufs = n_subbufs;
> chan->subbuf_size = subbuf_size;
This looks right to me. The kfree + direct return is correct, there's
nothing else that needs tear down in this function.
I think I'm 50/50 on the __GFP_NOWARN. We're only asking for 8 bytes per
cpu, and if that fails the system is pretty sick, so a warning could be
helpful. There's also logic in the percpu allocator to limit the number
of warnings printed. But see what others think.
Reviewed-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
cheers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-29 4:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-29 1:37 [PATCH] relay: handle alloc_percpu returning NULL in relay_open Daniel Axtens
2019-11-29 4:59 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2019-11-29 12:42 ` Andrew Donnellan
2019-11-30 6:04 ` Daniel Axtens
2019-12-23 16:36 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-12-24 0:26 ` Daniel Axtens
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=87d0dbffbk.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au \
--to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=ajd@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akash.goel@intel.com \
--cc=dja@axtens.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=syzbot+1e925b4b836afe85a1c6@syzkaller-ppc64.appspotmail.com \
--cc=syzbot+58320b7171734bf79d26@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=syzbot+587b2421926808309d21@syzkaller-ppc64.appspotmail.com \
--cc=syzbot+d6074fb08bdb2e010520@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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