From: Haibo Li <haibo.li@mediatek.com>
To: <andreyknvl@gmail.com>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>, <dvyukov@google.com>,
<glider@google.com>, <haibo.li@mediatek.com>, <jannh@google.com>,
<kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<mark.rutland@arm.com>, <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
<ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com>, <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
<xiaoming.yu@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kasan:fix access invalid shadow address when input is illegal
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 10:45:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230915024559.32806-1-haibo.li@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+fCnZePgv=V65t4FtJvcyKvhM6yA3amTbPnwc5Ft5YdzpeeRg@mail.gmail.com>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 10:41â¯PM Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Accessing unmapped memory with KASAN always led to a crash when
> > > checking shadow memory. This was reported/discussed before. To improve
> > > crash reporting for this case, Jann added kasan_non_canonical_hook and
> > > Mark integrated it into arm64. But AFAIU, for some reason, it stopped
> > > working.
> > >
> > > Instead of this patch, we need to figure out why
> > > kasan_non_canonical_hook stopped working and fix it.
> > >
> > > This approach taken by this patch won't work for shadow checks added
> > > by compiler instrumentation. It only covers explicitly checked
> > > accesses, such as via memcpy, etc.
> >
> > FWIW, AFAICS kasan_non_canonical_hook() currently only does anything
> > under CONFIG_KASAN_INLINE;
>
> Ah, right. I was thinking about the inline mode, but the patch refers
> to the issue with the outline mode.
>
> However, I just checked kasan_non_canonical_hook for SW_TAGS with the
> inline mode: it does not work when accessing 0x42ffffb80aaaaaaa, the
> addr < KASAN_SHADOW_OFFSET check fails. It appears there's something
> unusual about how instrumentation calculates the shadow address. I
> didn't investigate further yet.
>
> > I think the idea when I added that was that
> > it assumes that when KASAN checks an access in out-of-line
> > instrumentation or a slowpath, it will do the required checks to avoid
> > this kind of fault?
>
> Ah, no, KASAN doesn't do it.
>
> However, I suppose we could add what the original patch proposes for
> the outline mode. For the inline mode, it seems to be pointless, as
> most access checks happen though the compiler inserted code anyway.
>
> I also wonder how much slowdown this patch will introduce.
>
> Haibo, could you check how much slower the kernel becomes with your
> patch? If possible, with all GENERIC/SW_TAGS and INLINE/OUTLINE
> combinations.
>
> If the slowdown is large, we can just make kasan_non_canonical_hook
> work for both modes (and fix it for SW_TAGS).
Thanks.
The patch checks each shadow address,so it introduces extra overhead.
Now kasan_non_canonical_hook only works for CONFIG_KASAN_INLINE.
And CONFIG_KASAN_OUTLINE is set in my case.
Is it possible to make kasan_non_canonical_hook works for both
INLINE and OUTLINE by simply remove the "#ifdef CONFIG_KASAN_INLINE"?
Since kasan_non_canonical_hook is only used after kernel fault,it
is better if there is no limit.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-15 3:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-14 8:08 Haibo Li
2023-09-14 17:46 ` Andrey Konovalov
2023-09-14 18:29 ` Andrew Morton
2023-09-14 20:34 ` Andrey Konovalov
2023-09-14 20:40 ` Jann Horn
2023-09-15 1:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2023-09-15 2:45 ` Haibo Li [this message]
2023-09-15 9:40 ` Haibo Li
2023-09-15 16:53 ` Andrey Konovalov
2023-09-15 16:50 ` Andrey Konovalov
2023-09-15 17:04 ` Jann Horn
2023-09-18 8:12 ` Haibo Li
2023-09-18 7:25 ` Haibo Li
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=20230915024559.32806-1-haibo.li@mediatek.com \
--to=haibo.li@mediatek.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \
--cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com \
--cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
--cc=xiaoming.yu@mediatek.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