Re: [PATCH] mm: fix overflow in alloc_vmap_area

[Zhang Yanfei]

On 06/21/2013 06:51 AM, Daniel Baluta wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 06/20/2013 11:12 PM, Ghennadi Procopciuc wrote:
>>> Inserting the following kernel module:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> static int simple_test_init(void)
>>> {
>>>         size_t i, j;
>>>         void *address;
>>>
>>>         for (i = 0 * MB; i<  60 * MB; i += 1 * MB) {
>>>                 for (j = i; j<  i + 1 * MB; j += KB) {
>>>                         address = vmalloc(j);
>>>                         vfree(address);
>>>                 }
>>>         }
>>>
>>>         return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> </snip>
>>>
>>> triggers BUG at mm/vmalloc.c:310 on a x86 machine:
>>>
>>> [   95.218283] Kernel BUG at c1126cdb [verbose debug info unavailable]
>>> [   95.218306] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
>>> [   95.218324] Modules linked in: lkma_test(OF+)<snip lots of not tainted modules>
>>> [   95.218559] Pid: 2419, comm: insmod Tainted: GF          O 3.9.0+ #57 Hewlett-Packard HP Compaq 8200 Elite CMT PC/1494
>>> [   95.218597] EIP: 0060:[<c1126cdb>] EFLAGS: 00010207 CPU: 3
>>> [   95.218617] EIP is at __insert_vmap_area+0xfb/0x100
>>> [   95.218635] EAX: f85dc000 EBX: ef05cac0 ECX: f7be08c4 EDX: 00000007
>>> [   95.218657] ESI: f2ed044c EDI: c1a220b8 EBP: f027bd34 ESP: f027bd14
>>> [   95.218680]  DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 00e0 SS: 0068
>>> [   95.218699] CR0: 80050033 CR2: b5995118 CR3: 30364000 CR4: 000407f0
>>> [   95.218721] DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2: 00000000 DR3: 00000000
>>> [   95.218743] DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
>>> [   95.218758] Process insmod (pid: 2419, ti=f027a000 task=efe64010 task.ti=f027a000)
>>> [   95.218784] Stack:
>>> [   95.218792]  c177b964 fecfb000 f85e2000 00000000 f85dc000 ffbfe000 f02da1c0 0007f000
>>> [   95.218829]  f027bd7c c112802d c177b9b0 fecfb000 01305000 ffbfe000 00000001 ef05cac0
>>> [   95.218866]  00000000 00000000 f83fe000 01304fff f83fe000 ffffffff 01305000 ef05c500
>>> [   95.218903] Call Trace:
>>> [   95.218915]  [<f85e2000>] ? 0xf85e1fff
>>> [   95.218930]  [<f85dc000>] ? 0xf85dbfff
>>> [   95.218945]  [<c112802d>] alloc_vmap_area.isra.16+0x1bd/0x2f0
>>> [   95.218967]  [<c112867f>] __get_vm_area_node.isra.17+0x8f/0x130
>>> [   95.218988]  [<c1128d77>] __vmalloc_node_range+0x57/0x200
>>> [   95.219009]  [<f85f3075>] ? lkma_test_init+0x45/0x70 [lkma_test]
>>> [   95.219031]  [<c1128f82>] __vmalloc_node+0x62/0x70
>>> [   95.219049]  [<f85f3075>] ? lkma_test_init+0x45/0x70 [lkma_test]
>>> [   95.219071]  [<c1129058>] vmalloc+0x38/0x40
>>> [   95.219087]  [<f85f3075>] ? lkma_test_init+0x45/0x70 [lkma_test]
>>> [   95.219109]  [<f85f3075>] lkma_test_init+0x45/0x70 [lkma_test]
>>> [   95.219131]  [<f85f3030>] ? kzalloc+0x10/0x10 [lkma_test]
>>> [   95.219151]  [<c1001222>] do_one_initcall+0x112/0x160
>>> [   95.219171]  [<c15ca3cf>] ? set_section_ro_nx+0x54/0x59
>>> [   95.219190]  [<c1099b69>] load_module+0x1d79/0x2660
>>> [   95.219209]  [<c114721d>] ? create_object+0x19d/0x280
>>> [   95.219230]  [<c109a4c8>] sys_init_module+0x78/0xb0
>>> [   95.219250]  [<c15d9801>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x22
>>> [   95.219268] Code: 39 03 73 0c 8b 3f 89 f0 83 c7 08 e9 3d ff ff ff 8b 46 f4 39 43 04 76 13 8b 3f 89 f0 83 c7 04 e9 29 ff ff ff e8 fb 1b 4a 00 eb ab<0f>  0b 8d 76 00 55 89 e5 56 53 66 66 66 66 90 83 60 0c df 89 c6
>>> [   95.219415] EIP: [<c1126cdb>] __insert_vmap_area+0xfb/0x100 SS:ESP 0068:f027bd14
>>> [   95.228313] ---[ end trace e0a1efb2acb97c98 ]---
>>>
>>> A printk placed in __insert_vmap_area will show:
>>>
>>> [   95.218256] va->va_start=0xfecfb000 tmp_va->va_end=0xf85e2000 va->va_end=0 tmp_va->va_start=0xf85dc000
>>>
>>> and another one, before sum operation in alloc_vmap_area:
>>>
>>> [   95.218204] addr = 0xfecfb000 size = 19943424 vend = 0xffbfe000
>>>
>>> If after addition the result is smaller than one of the arguments,
>>> then an overflow occurred. In our case there is an obvious overflow.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ghennadi Procopciuc <unix140@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Daniel Baluta<dbaluta@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>  Don't know if this is the right solution, but the bug happens for me in
>>>  3.10-rc6 and 3.9.
>>
>> Hello Ghennadi,
>>
>> Could you please try the below patch to see if it is ok? The patch is based
>> on today's linus' tree.
> 
> Hi Zhang,
> 
> I have applied your patch and the bug seems to be fixed.
> 

Thanks for testing.

> Commit 89699605fe (mm: vmap area cache) suggests to use
> "addr + size  < addr" instead of "addr + size - 1 < addr" so I guess
> this is the correct fix.

Ah, yes. I didn't notice the comment in that commit before:)
>From the backtrace of Ghennadi's machine and his printk values,
we should believe the fix is correct.

> 
> thanks,
> Daniel.
> 


-- 
Thanks.
Zhang Yanfei
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/