From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
Subject: Re: SLUB: sysfs lets root force slab order below required minimum, causing memory corruption
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:22:37 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202003031820.7A0C4FF302@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2003031724400.77561@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 05:26:14PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020, Jann Horn wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > FYI, I noticed that if you do something like the following as root,
> > the system blows up pretty quickly with error messages about stuff
> > like corrupt freelist pointers because SLUB actually allows root to
> > force a page order that is smaller than what is required to store a
> > single object:
> >
> > echo 0 > /sys/kernel/slab/task_struct/order
> >
> > The other SLUB debugging options, like red_zone, also look kind of
> > suspicious with regards to races (either racing with other writes to
> > the SLUB debugging options, or with object allocations).
> >
>
> Thanks for the report, Jann. To address the most immediate issue,
> allowing a smaller order than allowed, I think we'd need something like
> this.
>
> I can propose it as a formal patch if nobody has any alternate
> suggestions?
> ---
> mm/slub.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -3598,7 +3598,7 @@ static int calculate_sizes(struct kmem_cache *s, int forced_order)
> */
> size = ALIGN(size, s->align);
> s->size = size;
> - if (forced_order >= 0)
> + if (forced_order >= slab_order(size, 1, MAX_ORDER, 1))
> order = forced_order;
> else
> order = calculate_order(size);
Seems reasonable!
For the race concerns, should this logic just make sure the resulting
order can never shrink? Or does it need much stronger atomicity?
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-04 2:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-04 0:23 SLUB: sysfs lets root force slab order below required minimum, causing memory corruption Jann Horn
2020-03-04 1:26 ` David Rientjes
2020-03-04 2:22 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2020-03-04 17:26 ` Vlastimil Babka
2020-03-04 20:39 ` David Rientjes
2020-03-08 19:34 ` Christopher Lameter
2020-03-04 14:57 ` Pekka Enberg
2020-03-04 13:17 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=202003031820.7A0C4FF302@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mjg59@google.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.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).