From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
To: "HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)" <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>
Cc: "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] mm, hwpoison: fix possible use-after-free in mf_dax_kill_procs()
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 15:32:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6dff6aec-833c-a3db-1180-09e395f6265a@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220819052324.GD613144@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
On 2022/8/19 13:23, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 09:00:14PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> After kill_procs(), tk will be freed without being removed from the to_kill
>> list. In the next iteration, the freed list entry in the to_kill list will
>> be accessed, thus leading to use-after-free issue.
>
> kill_procs() runs over the to_kill list and frees all listed items in each
> iteration. So just after returning from unmap_and_kill(), to_kill->next and
> to_kill->prev still point to the addresses of struct to_kill which was the
> first or last item (already freed!). This is bad-manered, but
> collect_procs_fsdax() in the next iteration calls list_add_tail() and
> overwrites the dangling pointers with newly allocated item. So this problem
list_add_tail will do WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new) where prev is already freed!
Or am I miss something?
> should not be so critical? Anyway, I agree with fixing this fragile code.
>
>> Fix it by reinitializing
>> the to_kill list after unmap_and_kill().
>>
>> Fixes: c36e20249571 ("mm: introduce mf_dax_kill_procs() for fsdax case")
>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
>
>> ---
>> mm/memory-failure.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
>> index 7023c3d81273..a2f4e8b00a26 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
>> @@ -1658,6 +1658,8 @@ int mf_dax_kill_procs(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index,
>> collect_procs_fsdax(page, mapping, index, &to_kill);
>> unmap_and_kill(&to_kill, page_to_pfn(page), mapping,
>> index, mf_flags);
>> + /* Reinitialize to_kill list for later resuing. */
>
> s/resuing/reusing/ ?
OK.
>
>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&to_kill);
>
> How about adding list_del() in kill_procs()? Other callers now use
> to_kill only once, but fixing generally looks tidier to me.
That's a good idea. Will do it in v2. Many thanks for your review, Naoya!
Thanks,
Miaohe Lin
>
> Thanks,
> Naoya Horiguchi
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-19 7:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-18 13:00 [PATCH 0/6] A few fixup patches for hugetlb Miaohe Lin
2022-08-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm, hwpoison: fix page refcnt leaking in try_memory_failure_hugetlb() Miaohe Lin
2022-08-19 5:20 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2022-08-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 2/6] mm, hwpoison: fix page refcnt leaking in unpoison_memory() Miaohe Lin
2022-08-19 5:21 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2022-08-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm, hwpoison: fix extra put_page() in soft_offline_page() Miaohe Lin
2022-08-19 5:21 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2022-08-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 4/6] mm, hwpoison: fix possible use-after-free in mf_dax_kill_procs() Miaohe Lin
2022-08-19 5:23 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2022-08-19 7:32 ` Miaohe Lin [this message]
2022-08-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm, hwpoison: kill procs if unmap fails Miaohe Lin
2022-08-19 5:24 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2022-08-19 7:37 ` Miaohe Lin
2022-08-19 8:18 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2022-08-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm, hwpoison: avoid trying to unpoison reserved page Miaohe Lin
2022-08-19 5:24 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2022-08-18 13:05 ` [PATCH 0/6] A few fixup patches for hugetlb Miaohe Lin
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=6dff6aec-833c-a3db-1180-09e395f6265a@huawei.com \
--to=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=naoya.horiguchi@nec.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