From: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: warn potential return NULL for kmalloc_array and kvmalloc_array with __GFP_NOFAIL
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 19:22:37 +1200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGsJ_4x0Bak+H0zJNH4FKLqd-Dmm4HhT5S4CzsoUaNiDKHNTtA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zpi9JJGUih2_VAMF@tiehlicka>
On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 6:58 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu 18-07-24 11:00:25, Barry Song wrote:
> > From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
> >
> > Overflow in this context is highly unlikely. However, allocations using
> > GFP_NOFAIL are guaranteed to succeed, so checking the return value is
> > unnecessary. One option to fix this is allowing memory allocation with
> > an overflowed size, but it seems pointless. Let's at least issue a
> > warning. Likely BUG_ON() seems better as anyway we can't fix it?
>
> WARN_ON is effectively BUG_ON with panic_on_warn so if this happens to
> be in a user triggerable path then you would have an easy way to panic
> the whole machine. It is likely true that the kernel could oops just
> right after the failure but that could be recoverable at least.
>
> If anything I would just pr_warn with caller address or add dump_stack
> to capture the full trace. That would give us the caller that needs
> fixing without panicing the system with panic_on_warn.
>
> Btw. what has led you to create this patch? Have you encountered a
> misbehaving caller?
I didn't encounter any misbehaving callers in the in-tree code. I was
debugging another bug potentially related to kvmalloc in my out-of-tree
drivers, so I reviewed all the code and noticed the NULL return for
GFP_NOFAIL.
For future-proofing and security reasons, returning NULL for NOFAIL
still seems incorrect as the callers won't check the ret. If any future or
existing in-tree code has a potential bug which might be exploited by
hackers, for example
ptr = kvmalloc_array(NOFAIL);
ptr->callback(); //ptr=NULL;
callback could be a privilege escalation?
I'm not a security expert, so hopefully others can provide some
insights :-)
>
> Realistically speaking k*malloc(GFP_NOFAIL) with large values (still
> far from overflow) would be very dangerous as well. So I am not really
> sure this is buying us much if anything at all.
>
> > Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> > Cc: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
> > Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
> > Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> > Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> > Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> > Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
> > Cc: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/slab.h | 8 ++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/slab.h b/include/linux/slab.h
> > index a332dd2fa6cd..c6aec311864f 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/slab.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/slab.h
> > @@ -692,8 +692,10 @@ static inline __alloc_size(1, 2) void *kmalloc_array_noprof(size_t n, size_t siz
> > {
> > size_t bytes;
> >
> > - if (unlikely(check_mul_overflow(n, size, &bytes)))
> > + if (unlikely(check_mul_overflow(n, size, &bytes))) {
> > + WARN_ON(flags & __GFP_NOFAIL);
> > return NULL;
> > + }
> > if (__builtin_constant_p(n) && __builtin_constant_p(size))
> > return kmalloc_noprof(bytes, flags);
> > return kmalloc_noprof(bytes, flags);
> > @@ -794,8 +796,10 @@ kvmalloc_array_node_noprof(size_t n, size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node)
> > {
> > size_t bytes;
> >
> > - if (unlikely(check_mul_overflow(n, size, &bytes)))
> > + if (unlikely(check_mul_overflow(n, size, &bytes))) {
> > + WARN_ON(flags & __GFP_NOFAIL);
> > return NULL;
> > + }
> >
> > return kvmalloc_node_noprof(bytes, flags, node);
> > }
> > --
> > 2.34.1
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
Thanks
Barry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-18 7:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-17 23:00 Barry Song
2024-07-18 6:58 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18 7:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-18 7:12 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18 8:16 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-18 7:22 ` Barry Song [this message]
2024-07-18 7:27 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18 7:41 ` Barry Song
2024-07-18 7:53 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18 8:18 ` Barry Song
2024-07-18 8:32 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18 8:43 ` Barry Song
2024-07-18 8:50 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 0:35 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 7:02 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 7:07 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 7:42 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 7:51 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 8:01 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 8:28 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 8:40 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 9:36 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 9:45 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 9:58 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 10:57 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 11:05 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 11:19 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 8:50 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19 9:33 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 10:10 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19 10:52 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 11:13 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19 11:26 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 13:02 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 13:30 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-20 0:36 ` Barry Song
2024-07-22 7:23 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-22 7:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19 7:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-19 7:43 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 7:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-20 22:14 ` Barry Song
2024-07-22 7:26 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-22 8:09 ` Barry Song
2024-07-22 9:01 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-22 23:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-22 23:22 ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 8:35 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-18 7:48 ` Hailong Liu
2024-07-18 8:33 ` Barry Song
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=CAGsJ_4x0Bak+H0zJNH4FKLqd-Dmm4HhT5S4CzsoUaNiDKHNTtA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=21cnbao@gmail.com \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lstoakes@gmail.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=v-songbaohua@oppo.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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