Re: [PATCH 2/2] nouveau/dmem: Fix memory leak in `migrate_to_ram` upon copy error

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nouveau/dmem: Fix memory leak in `migrate_to_ram` upon copy error

[Yonatan Maman]

On 30/09/2024 14:20, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 01:54:58PM +0000, Yonatan Maman wrote:
>> A copy push command might fail, causing `migrate_to_ram` to return a
>> dirty HIGH_USER page to the user.
>>
>> This exposes a security vulnerability in the nouveau driver. To prevent
>> memory leaks in `migrate_to_ram` upon a copy error, allocate a zero
>> page for the destination page.
> 
> So, you refer to the case where this function fails in nouveau_dmem_copy_one()?
> 
> If so, can you please explain why adding __GFP_ZERO to alloc_page_vma() helps
> with that?
> 

The nouveau_dmem_copy_one function ensures that the copy push command is 
sent to the device firmware but does not track whether it was executed 
successfully.

In the case of a copy error (e.g., firmware or hardware error), the 
command will be sent in the firmware channel, and nouveau_dmem_copy_one 
might succeed, as well as the migrate_to_ram function. Thus, a dirty 
page could be returned to the user.

It’s important to note that we attempted to use nouveau_fence_wait 
status to handle migration errors, but it does not catch all error types.

To avoid this vulnerability, we allocate a zero page. So that, in case 
of an error, a non-dirty (zero) page will be returned to the user.

>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yonatan Maman <Ymaman@Nvidia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Gal Shalom <GalShalom@Nvidia.com>
> 
> Since this is a bug, please also add a 'Fixes' tag, CC stable and add a
> 'Co-developed-by' tag if appropriate.

sure, thanks, I will add, and push it as V2 patch-series.
> 
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c
>> index 6fb65b01d778..097bd3af0719 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c
>> @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static vm_fault_t nouveau_dmem_migrate_to_ram(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>        if (!spage || !(src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
>>                goto done;
>>
>> -     dpage = alloc_page_vma(GFP_HIGHUSER, vmf->vma, vmf->address);
>> +     dpage = alloc_page_vma(GFP_HIGHUSER | __GFP_ZERO, vmf->vma, vmf->address);
>>        if (!dpage)
>>                goto done;
>>
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nouveau/dmem: Fix memory leak in `migrate_to_ram` upon copy error

[Danilo Krummrich]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 03:28:22PM +0300, Yonatan Maman wrote:
> 
> 
> On 30/09/2024 14:20, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 01:54:58PM +0000, Yonatan Maman wrote:
> > > A copy push command might fail, causing `migrate_to_ram` to return a
> > > dirty HIGH_USER page to the user.
> > > 
> > > This exposes a security vulnerability in the nouveau driver. To prevent
> > > memory leaks in `migrate_to_ram` upon a copy error, allocate a zero
> > > page for the destination page.
> > 
> > So, you refer to the case where this function fails in nouveau_dmem_copy_one()?
> > 
> > If so, can you please explain why adding __GFP_ZERO to alloc_page_vma() helps
> > with that?
> > 
> 
> The nouveau_dmem_copy_one function ensures that the copy push command is
> sent to the device firmware but does not track whether it was executed
> successfully.
> 
> In the case of a copy error (e.g., firmware or hardware error), the command
> will be sent in the firmware channel, and nouveau_dmem_copy_one might
> succeed, as well as the migrate_to_ram function. Thus, a dirty page could be
> returned to the user.
> 
> It’s important to note that we attempted to use nouveau_fence_wait status to
> handle migration errors, but it does not catch all error types.
> 
> To avoid this vulnerability, we allocate a zero page. So that, in case of an
> error, a non-dirty (zero) page will be returned to the user.

I see, I got confused by calling this a 'memory leak'.

Please add this description in the commit message and avoid the term 'memory
leak' in this context.

> 
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Yonatan Maman <Ymaman@Nvidia.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Gal Shalom <GalShalom@Nvidia.com>
> > 
> > Since this is a bug, please also add a 'Fixes' tag, CC stable and add a
> > 'Co-developed-by' tag if appropriate.
> 
> sure, thanks, I will add, and push it as V2 patch-series.
> > 
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c | 2 +-
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c
> > > index 6fb65b01d778..097bd3af0719 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_dmem.c
> > > @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static vm_fault_t nouveau_dmem_migrate_to_ram(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > >        if (!spage || !(src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
> > >                goto done;
> > > 
> > > -     dpage = alloc_page_vma(GFP_HIGHUSER, vmf->vma, vmf->address);
> > > +     dpage = alloc_page_vma(GFP_HIGHUSER | __GFP_ZERO, vmf->vma, vmf->address);
> > >        if (!dpage)
> > >                goto done;
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > > 
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/2] nouveau/dmem: Fix privileged error in copy engine channel

[Yonatan Maman]

On 30/09/2024 14:09, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> Hi Yonatan,
> 
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 01:54:56PM +0000, Yonatan Maman wrote:
>> When `nouveau_dmem_copy_one` is called, the following error occurs:
>>
>> [272146.675156] nouveau 0000:06:00.0: fifo: PBDMA9: 00000004 [HCE_PRIV]
>> ch 1 00000300 00003386
>>
>> This indicates that a copy push command triggered a Host Copy Engine
>> Privileged error on channel 1 (Copy Engine channel). To address this
>> issue, modify the Copy Engine channel to allow privileged push commands
>>
>> Fixes: 6de125383a5cc
>> Signed-off-by: Yonatan Maman <Ymaman@Nvidia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Gal Shalom <GalShalom@Nvidia.com>
> 
> Please read [1] and use scripts/checkpatch.pl and scripts/get_maintainer.pl
> before sending patches.
> 
> In particular, the 'Fixes' tag has a defined format, I recommend:
> 
> ```
> [core]
>          abbrev = 12
> [pretty]
>          fixes = Fixes: %h (\"%s\")
> ```
> 
> in your `.gitconfig`.
> 
> Also make sure so use 'Co-developed-by' if there is a co-author; I see that this
> patch is also signed off by Gal Shalom.
> 
> Please also send the patches to all relevant mailing lists and maintainers to
> avoid your patches not getting the required attention.
> 
> [1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html

Thanks for the feedback! I will address these comments and send V2 
patch-set.

> 
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>> index a58c31089613..0a75ce4c5021 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>> @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ nouveau_accel_ce_init(struct nouveau_drm *drm)
>>                return;
>>        }
>>
>> -     ret = nouveau_channel_new(drm, device, false, runm, NvDmaFB, NvDmaTT, &drm->cechan);
>> +     ret = nouveau_channel_new(drm, device, true, runm, NvDmaFB, NvDmaTT, &drm->cechan);
>>        if (ret)
>>                NV_ERROR(drm, "failed to create ce channel, %d\n", ret);
>>   }
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>