From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Use after free in workingset LRU handling
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 09:13:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160518071314.GA26315@quack2.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160518060348.GA31056@cmpxchg.org>
Hi Johannes!
On Wed 18-05-16 02:03:48, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 07:27:22PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > when testing recent DAX fixes, I was puzzled by shadow_lru_isolate()
> > barfing on radix tree nodes attached to DAX mappings (as DAX mappings have
> > no shadow entries and I took care to not insert radix tree nodes for such
> > mappings into workingset_shadow_nodes LRU list. After some investigation, I
> > think there is a use after free issue in the handling of radix tree nodes
> > by workingset code. The following seems to be possible:
> >
> > Radix tree node is created, is has two page pointers for indices 0 and 1.
> >
> > Page pointer for index 0 gets replaced with a shadow entry, radix tree
> > node gets inserted into workingset_shadow_nodes
> >
> > Truncate happens removing page at index 1, __radix_tree_delete_node() in
> > page_cache_tree_delete() frees the radix tree node (as it has only single
> > entry at index 0 and thus we can shrink the tree) while it is still in LRU
> > list!
>
> Due to the way shadow entries are counted, the tree is not actually
> shrunk if there is one shadow at index 0.
>
> /*
> * The candidate node has more than one child, or its child
> * is not at the leftmost slot, or it is a multiorder entry,
> * we cannot shrink.
> */
> if (to_free->count != 1)
> break;
>
> vs:
>
> static inline void workingset_node_shadows_inc(struct radix_tree_node *node)
> {
> node->count += 1U << RADIX_TREE_COUNT_SHIFT;
> }
>
> So the use-after-free scenario isn't possible here.
Ouch, you are right.
> Admittedly, it really isn't pretty. The mess is caused by the page
> cache mucking around with structures that should be private to the
> radix tree implementation, but I can't think of a good way to solve
> this without increasing struct radix_tree_node.
Yeah, it's a catch but I agree it should work as designed. Sorry for the
noise.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-18 7:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-12 17:27 Jan Kara
2016-05-18 6:03 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-05-18 7:13 ` Jan Kara [this message]
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=20160518071314.GA26315@quack2.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
/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