From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@huawei.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
npiggin@suse.de, Mingfangsen <mingfangsen@huawei.com>,
Guiyao <guiyao@huawei.com>, zhangsaisai <zhangsaisai@huawei.com>,
"wubo (T)" <wubo40@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] brd: check parameter validation before register_blkdev func
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 19:04:46 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200113110003.GA13011@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <342ee238-0e7c-c213-eecc-7062f24985cc@huawei.com>
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 01:10:20PM +0800, Zhiqiang Liu wrote:
>
> In brd_init func, rd_nr num of brd_device are firstly allocated
> and add in brd_devices, then brd_devices are traversed to add each
> brd_device by calling add_disk func. When allocating brd_device,
> the disk->first_minor is set to i * max_part, if rd_nr * max_part
> is larger than MINORMASK, two different brd_device may have the same
> devt, then only one of them can be successfully added.
> when rmmod brd.ko, it will cause oops when calling brd_exit.
>
> Follow those steps:
> # modprobe brd rd_nr=3 rd_size=102400 max_part=1048576
> # rmmod brd
> then, the oops will appear.
>
> Oops log:
> [ 726.613722] Call trace:
> [ 726.614175] kernfs_find_ns+0x24/0x130
> [ 726.614852] kernfs_find_and_get_ns+0x44/0x68
> [ 726.615749] sysfs_remove_group+0x38/0xb0
> [ 726.616520] blk_trace_remove_sysfs+0x1c/0x28
> [ 726.617320] blk_unregister_queue+0x98/0x100
> [ 726.618105] del_gendisk+0x144/0x2b8
> [ 726.618759] brd_exit+0x68/0x560 [brd]
> [ 726.619501] __arm64_sys_delete_module+0x19c/0x2a0
> [ 726.620384] el0_svc_common+0x78/0x130
> [ 726.621057] el0_svc_handler+0x38/0x78
> [ 726.621738] el0_svc+0x8/0xc
> [ 726.622259] Code: aa0203f6 aa0103f7 aa1e03e0 d503201f (7940e260)
>
> Here, we add brd_check_par_valid func to check parameter
> validation before register_blkdev func.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/block/brd.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/brd.c b/drivers/block/brd.c
> index df8103dd40ac..3a4510b2c24f 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/brd.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/brd.c
> @@ -330,16 +330,16 @@ static const struct block_device_operations brd_fops = {
> /*
> * And now the modules code and kernel interface.
> */
> -static int rd_nr = CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_COUNT;
> -module_param(rd_nr, int, 0444);
> +static unsigned int rd_nr = CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_COUNT;
> +module_param(rd_nr, uint, 0444);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(rd_nr, "Maximum number of brd devices");
>
> unsigned long rd_size = CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_SIZE;
> module_param(rd_size, ulong, 0444);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(rd_size, "Size of each RAM disk in kbytes.");
>
> -static int max_part = 1;
> -module_param(max_part, int, 0444);
> +static unsigned int max_part = 1;
> +module_param(max_part, uint, 0444);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(max_part, "Num Minors to reserve between devices");
>
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> @@ -468,10 +468,25 @@ static struct kobject *brd_probe(dev_t dev, int *part, void *data)
> return kobj;
> }
>
> +static inline int brd_check_par_valid(void)
> +{
> + if (unlikely(!rd_nr))
> + rd_nr = 1;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!max_part))
> + max_part = 1;
> +
> + if (rd_nr * max_part > MINORMASK)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +}
> +
> static int __init brd_init(void)
> {
> struct brd_device *brd, *next;
> - int i;
> + int i, ret;
>
> /*
> * brd module now has a feature to instantiate underlying device
> @@ -488,11 +503,15 @@ static int __init brd_init(void)
> * dynamically.
> */
>
> + ret = brd_check_par_valid();
> + if (ret) {
> + pr_info("brd: invalid parameter setting!!!\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
The max supported partition number is 256, see __alloc_disk_node().
So even though one bigger number is passed to alloc_disk(), at most
256 partitions are allowed on that disk. Maybe you can apply the
following way to avoid the issue:
disk->first_minor = i * disk->minors;
However, looks 'rd_nr' still needs to be validated(rd_nr < 2 ^ 23).
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-13 11:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-10 5:10 [PATCH] brd: check parameter validation before register_blkdev func Zhiqiang Liu
2020-01-13 9:55 ` Zhiqiang Liu
2020-01-13 11:04 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2020-01-13 12:55 ` Zhiqiang Liu
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=20200113110003.GA13011@ming.t460p \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=guiyao@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuzhiqiang26@huawei.com \
--cc=mingfangsen@huawei.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=wubo40@huawei.com \
--cc=zhangsaisai@huawei.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).