From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752258AbdK3SKp (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:10:45 -0500
Received: from mail-vk0-f66.google.com ([209.85.213.66]:46450 "EHLO
        mail-vk0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750885AbdK3SKn (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:10:43 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYVbgJPwbcJLhn6g9LsSP2gOSrKci/TBNzIYqZVvdy8cWqBOZoAOyNvqJciJ5LayUSkPIyKoWQ+Nfm1DTjo7fU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+bji1JMJVJZdv=+bD8JZ1kqrmJ0PWXvHdYzRFcnAKDSGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20171126063117.oytmra3tqoj5546u@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com>
 <20171127210301.GA55812@localhost.corp.microsoft.com> <20171128124534.3jvuala525wvn64r@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com>
 <20171129175430.GA58181@big-sky.attlocal.net> <CACT4Y+bji1JMJVJZdv=+bD8JZ1kqrmJ0PWXvHdYzRFcnAKDSGw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:10:41 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 71FUpolAD5bI4swDIbB47ytR58o
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLOojG_Nc50KhdHsXDQQ27G+kOPp6-5kQz7Yh5Vpgucnw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pcpu] BUG: KASAN: use-after-scope in pcpu_setup_first_chunk+0x1e3b/0x29e2
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@gmail.com>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKP <lkp@01.org>, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I spent a bit of time learning more about this problem as Fengguang was
>> able to determine the root commit f7dd2507893cc3. I reproduced the bug
>> in userspace to make life a bit easier and below the assignment occurs
>> before the unpoison. This is fine if we're sequentially proceeding, but
>> as in the case in percpu, it's calling the function in a for loop
>> causing the assignment to happen after it has been poisoned in the prior
>> iteration.
>>
>> <bb 3> [0.00%]:
>>   _1 = (long unsigned int) i_4;
>>   _2 = _1 * 16;
>>   _3 = p_8 + _2;
>>   list_14 = _3;
>>   __u = {};
>>   ASAN_MARK (UNPOISON, &__u, 8);
>>   __u.__val = list_14;
>>
>> <bb 9> [0.00%]:
>>   _24 = __u.__val;
>>   ASAN_MARK (POISON, &__u, 8);
>>   list_14->prev = list_14;
>>   i_13 = i_4 + 1;
>>
>> <bb 10> [0.00%]:
>>   # i_4 = PHI <i_9(2), i_13(9)>
>>   if (i_4 <= 9)
>>     goto <bb 3>; [0.00%]
>>   else
>>     goto <bb 11>; [0.00%]
>>
>> I don't know how to go about fixing this though. The reproducing code is
>> below and was compiled with gcc-7 and the structleak_plugin.
>
>
> Are we sure that structleak plugin is not at fault? If yes, then we
> need to report this to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ with instructions
> on how to build/use the plugin.

I thought from earlier in this thread that the bug just changed
locations depending on the plugin. Does the issue still exist with the
plugin disabled?

-Kees

>
>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dennis
>>
>> ----
>> #include <stdint.h>
>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>
>> #define barrier()
>>
>> #define WRITE_ONCE(x, val) \
>> ({                                                      \
>>         union { typeof(x) __val; char __c[1]; } __u =   \
>>                 { .__val = (typeof(x)) (val) }; \
>>         __write_once_size(&(x), __u.__c, sizeof(x));    \
>>         __u.__val;                                      \
>> })
>>
>> typedef         uint8_t         __u8;
>> typedef         uint16_t        __u16;
>> typedef         uint32_t        __u32;
>> typedef         uint64_t        __u64;
>>
>> static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int size)
>> {
>>         switch (size) {
>>         case 1: *(volatile __u8 *)p = *(__u8 *)res; break;
>>         case 2: *(volatile __u16 *)p = *(__u16 *)res; break;
>>         case 4: *(volatile __u32 *)p = *(__u32 *)res; break;
>>         case 8: *(volatile __u64 *)p = *(__u64 *)res; break;
>>         default:
>>                 barrier();
>>                 __builtin_memcpy((void *)p, (const void *)res, size);
>>                 barrier();
>>         }
>> }
>>
>> struct list_head {
>>         struct list_head *next, *prev;
>> };
>>
>> static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void INIT_LIST_HEAD(struct list_head *list)
>> {
>>         WRITE_ONCE(list->next, list);
>>         list->prev = list;
>> }
>>
>> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> {
>>         struct list_head *p = malloc(10 * sizeof(struct list_head));
>>         int i;
>>
>>         for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
>>                 INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p[i]);
>>         }
>>
>>         free(p);
>>
>>         return 0;
>> }



-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
Received: from mail-ua0-f200.google.com (mail-ua0-f200.google.com [209.85.217.200])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B23426B0273
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:10:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-ua0-f200.google.com with SMTP id e26so4444793uaf.7
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:10:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65])
        by mx.google.com with SMTPS id p77sor352041vkd.8.2017.11.30.10.10.43
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>
        (Google Transport Security);
        Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:10:43 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+bji1JMJVJZdv=+bD8JZ1kqrmJ0PWXvHdYzRFcnAKDSGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20171126063117.oytmra3tqoj5546u@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com>
 <20171127210301.GA55812@localhost.corp.microsoft.com> <20171128124534.3jvuala525wvn64r@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com>
 <20171129175430.GA58181@big-sky.attlocal.net> <CACT4Y+bji1JMJVJZdv=+bD8JZ1kqrmJ0PWXvHdYzRFcnAKDSGw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:10:41 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLOojG_Nc50KhdHsXDQQ27G+kOPp6-5kQz7Yh5Vpgucnw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pcpu] BUG: KASAN: use-after-scope in pcpu_setup_first_chunk+0x1e3b/0x29e2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-mm.kvack.org>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@gmail.com>, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@01.org>, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I spent a bit of time learning more about this problem as Fengguang was
>> able to determine the root commit f7dd2507893cc3. I reproduced the bug
>> in userspace to make life a bit easier and below the assignment occurs
>> before the unpoison. This is fine if we're sequentially proceeding, but
>> as in the case in percpu, it's calling the function in a for loop
>> causing the assignment to happen after it has been poisoned in the prior
>> iteration.
>>
>> <bb 3> [0.00%]:
>>   _1 = (long unsigned int) i_4;
>>   _2 = _1 * 16;
>>   _3 = p_8 + _2;
>>   list_14 = _3;
>>   __u = {};
>>   ASAN_MARK (UNPOISON, &__u, 8);
>>   __u.__val = list_14;
>>
>> <bb 9> [0.00%]:
>>   _24 = __u.__val;
>>   ASAN_MARK (POISON, &__u, 8);
>>   list_14->prev = list_14;
>>   i_13 = i_4 + 1;
>>
>> <bb 10> [0.00%]:
>>   # i_4 = PHI <i_9(2), i_13(9)>
>>   if (i_4 <= 9)
>>     goto <bb 3>; [0.00%]
>>   else
>>     goto <bb 11>; [0.00%]
>>
>> I don't know how to go about fixing this though. The reproducing code is
>> below and was compiled with gcc-7 and the structleak_plugin.
>
>
> Are we sure that structleak plugin is not at fault? If yes, then we
> need to report this to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ with instructions
> on how to build/use the plugin.

I thought from earlier in this thread that the bug just changed
locations depending on the plugin. Does the issue still exist with the
plugin disabled?

-Kees

>
>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dennis
>>
>> ----
>> #include <stdint.h>
>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>
>> #define barrier()
>>
>> #define WRITE_ONCE(x, val) \
>> ({                                                      \
>>         union { typeof(x) __val; char __c[1]; } __u =   \
>>                 { .__val = (typeof(x)) (val) }; \
>>         __write_once_size(&(x), __u.__c, sizeof(x));    \
>>         __u.__val;                                      \
>> })
>>
>> typedef         uint8_t         __u8;
>> typedef         uint16_t        __u16;
>> typedef         uint32_t        __u32;
>> typedef         uint64_t        __u64;
>>
>> static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int size)
>> {
>>         switch (size) {
>>         case 1: *(volatile __u8 *)p = *(__u8 *)res; break;
>>         case 2: *(volatile __u16 *)p = *(__u16 *)res; break;
>>         case 4: *(volatile __u32 *)p = *(__u32 *)res; break;
>>         case 8: *(volatile __u64 *)p = *(__u64 *)res; break;
>>         default:
>>                 barrier();
>>                 __builtin_memcpy((void *)p, (const void *)res, size);
>>                 barrier();
>>         }
>> }
>>
>> struct list_head {
>>         struct list_head *next, *prev;
>> };
>>
>> static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void INIT_LIST_HEAD(struct list_head *list)
>> {
>>         WRITE_ONCE(list->next, list);
>>         list->prev = list;
>> }
>>
>> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> {
>>         struct list_head *p = malloc(10 * sizeof(struct list_head));
>>         int i;
>>
>>         for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
>>                 INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p[i]);
>>         }
>>
>>         free(p);
>>
>>         return 0;
>> }



-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

--
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>

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0222962623193485221=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [pcpu] BUG: KASAN: use-after-scope in pcpu_setup_first_chunk+0x1e3b/0x29e2
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:10:41 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLOojG_Nc50KhdHsXDQQ27G+kOPp6-5kQz7Yh5Vpgucnw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+bji1JMJVJZdv=+bD8JZ1kqrmJ0PWXvHdYzRFcnAKDSGw@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: <oe-lkp.lists.linux.dev>

--===============0222962623193485221==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@gmail.com> wr=
ote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I spent a bit of time learning more about this problem as Fengguang was
>> able to determine the root commit f7dd2507893cc3. I reproduced the bug
>> in userspace to make life a bit easier and below the assignment occurs
>> before the unpoison. This is fine if we're sequentially proceeding, but
>> as in the case in percpu, it's calling the function in a for loop
>> causing the assignment to happen after it has been poisoned in the prior
>> iteration.
>>
>> <bb 3> [0.00%]:
>>   _1 =3D (long unsigned int) i_4;
>>   _2 =3D _1 * 16;
>>   _3 =3D p_8 + _2;
>>   list_14 =3D _3;
>>   __u =3D {};
>>   ASAN_MARK (UNPOISON, &__u, 8);
>>   __u.__val =3D list_14;
>>
>> <bb 9> [0.00%]:
>>   _24 =3D __u.__val;
>>   ASAN_MARK (POISON, &__u, 8);
>>   list_14->prev =3D list_14;
>>   i_13 =3D i_4 + 1;
>>
>> <bb 10> [0.00%]:
>>   # i_4 =3D PHI <i_9(2), i_13(9)>
>>   if (i_4 <=3D 9)
>>     goto <bb 3>; [0.00%]
>>   else
>>     goto <bb 11>; [0.00%]
>>
>> I don't know how to go about fixing this though. The reproducing code is
>> below and was compiled with gcc-7 and the structleak_plugin.
>
>
> Are we sure that structleak plugin is not at fault? If yes, then we
> need to report this to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ with instructions
> on how to build/use the plugin.

I thought from earlier in this thread that the bug just changed
locations depending on the plugin. Does the issue still exist with the
plugin disabled?

-Kees

>
>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dennis
>>
>> ----
>> #include <stdint.h>
>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>
>> #define barrier()
>>
>> #define WRITE_ONCE(x, val) \
>> ({                                                      \
>>         union { typeof(x) __val; char __c[1]; } __u =3D   \
>>                 { .__val =3D (typeof(x)) (val) }; \
>>         __write_once_size(&(x), __u.__c, sizeof(x));    \
>>         __u.__val;                                      \
>> })
>>
>> typedef         uint8_t         __u8;
>> typedef         uint16_t        __u16;
>> typedef         uint32_t        __u32;
>> typedef         uint64_t        __u64;
>>
>> static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void __write_once_size(vola=
tile void *p, void *res, int size)
>> {
>>         switch (size) {
>>         case 1: *(volatile __u8 *)p =3D *(__u8 *)res; break;
>>         case 2: *(volatile __u16 *)p =3D *(__u16 *)res; break;
>>         case 4: *(volatile __u32 *)p =3D *(__u32 *)res; break;
>>         case 8: *(volatile __u64 *)p =3D *(__u64 *)res; break;
>>         default:
>>                 barrier();
>>                 __builtin_memcpy((void *)p, (const void *)res, size);
>>                 barrier();
>>         }
>> }
>>
>> struct list_head {
>>         struct list_head *next, *prev;
>> };
>>
>> static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void INIT_LIST_HEAD(struct =
list_head *list)
>> {
>>         WRITE_ONCE(list->next, list);
>>         list->prev =3D list;
>> }
>>
>> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> {
>>         struct list_head *p =3D malloc(10 * sizeof(struct list_head));
>>         int i;
>>
>>         for (i =3D 0; i < 10; i++) {
>>                 INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p[i]);
>>         }
>>
>>         free(p);
>>
>>         return 0;
>> }



-- =

Kees Cook
Pixel Security

--===============0222962623193485221==--