On 08/16/2016 01:14 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
As currently implemented, when creating a new pipe or increasing
a pipe's capacity with fcntl(F_SETPIPE_SZ), the checks against
the limits in /proc/sys/fs/pipe-user-pages-{soft,hard} (added by
commit 759c01142a5d0) do not include the pages required for the
new pipe or increased capacity. In the case of fcntl(F_SETPIPE_SZ),
this means that an unprivileged user can make a one-time capacity
increase that pushes the user consumption over the limits by up
to the value specified in /proc/sys/fs/pipe-max-size (which
defaults to 1 MiB, but might be set to a much higher value).
This patch remedies the problem by including the capacity required
for the new pipe or the pipe capacity increase in the check against
the limit.
There is a small chance that this change could break user-space,
since there are cases where pipe() and fcntl(F_SETPIPE_SZ) calls
that previously succeeded might fail. However, the chances are
small, since (a) the pipe-user-pages-{soft,hard} limits are new
(in 4.5), and the default soft/hard limits are high/unlimited.
Therefore, it seems warranted to make these limits operate more
precisely (and behave more like what users probably expect).
Using the test program shown in the previous patch, on an unpatched
kernel, we first set some limits:
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/fs/pipe-user-pages-soft
# echo 1000000000 > /proc/sys/fs/pipe-max-size
# echo 10000 > /proc/sys/fs/pipe-user-pages-hard # 40.96 MB
Then show that we can set a pipe with capacity (100MB) that is
over the hard limit
# sudo -u mtk ./test_F_SETPIPE_SZ 1 100000000
Loop 1: set pipe capacity to 100000000 bytes
F_SETPIPE_SZ returned 134217728
Now set the capacity to 100MB twice. The second call fails (which is
probably surprising to most users, since it seems like a no-op):
# sudo -u mtk ./test_F_SETPIPE_SZ 1 100000000 0 100000000
Loop 1: set pipe capacity to 100000000 bytes
F_SETPIPE_SZ returned 134217728
Loop 2: set pipe capacity to 100000000 bytes
Loop 2, pipe 0: F_SETPIPE_SZ failed: fcntl: Operation not permitted
With a patched kernel, setting a capacity over the limit fails at the
first attempt:
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/fs/pipe-user-pages-soft
# echo 1000000000 > /proc/sys/fs/pipe-max-size
# echo 10000 > /proc/sys/fs/pipe-user-pages-hard
# sudo -u mtk ./test_F_SETPIPE_SZ 1 100000000
Loop 1: set pipe capacity to 100000000 bytes
Loop 1, pipe 0: F_SETPIPE_SZ failed: fcntl: Operation not permitted
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: socketpair@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxx>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/pipe.c | 24 ++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/pipe.c b/fs/pipe.c
index a98ebca..397d8d9 100644
--- a/fs/pipe.c
+++ b/fs/pipe.c
@@ -610,16 +610,20 @@ static void account_pipe_buffers(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe,
atomic_long_add(new - old, &pipe->user->pipe_bufs);
}
-static bool too_many_pipe_buffers_soft(struct user_struct *user)
+static bool too_many_pipe_buffers_soft(struct user_struct *user,
+ unsigned int nr_pages)
{
return pipe_user_pages_soft &&
- atomic_long_read(&user->pipe_bufs) >= pipe_user_pages_soft;
+ atomic_long_read(&user->pipe_bufs) + nr_pages >=
+ pipe_user_pages_soft;
}
-static bool too_many_pipe_buffers_hard(struct user_struct *user)
+static bool too_many_pipe_buffers_hard(struct user_struct *user,
+ unsigned int nr_pages)
{
return pipe_user_pages_hard &&
- atomic_long_read(&user->pipe_bufs) >= pipe_user_pages_hard;
+ atomic_long_read(&user->pipe_bufs) + nr_pages >=
+ pipe_user_pages_hard;
}
struct pipe_inode_info *alloc_pipe_info(void)
@@ -631,13 +635,13 @@ struct pipe_inode_info *alloc_pipe_info(void)
unsigned long pipe_bufs = PIPE_DEF_BUFFERS;
struct user_struct *user = get_current_user();
- if (!too_many_pipe_buffers_hard(user)) {
- if (too_many_pipe_buffers_soft(user))
- pipe_bufs = 1;
+ if (too_many_pipe_buffers_soft(user, PIPE_DEF_BUFFERS))
Why not pass pipe_bufs here instead of PIPE_DEF_BUFFERS?
+ pipe_bufs = 1;
+
+ if (!too_many_pipe_buffers_hard(user, pipe_bufs))
pipe->bufs = kcalloc(pipe_bufs,
sizeof(struct pipe_buffer),
GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
- }
if (pipe->bufs) {
init_waitqueue_head(&pipe->wait);
Not your fault, but this function is a bit weird in that if the
too_many_pipe_buffers() calls fail, we'll return ENFILE to userspace?
Same if kcalloc() fails.
@@ -1132,8 +1136,8 @@ long pipe_fcntl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) && size > pipe_max_size) {
ret = -EPERM;
goto out;
- } else if ((too_many_pipe_buffers_hard(pipe->user) ||
- too_many_pipe_buffers_soft(pipe->user)) &&
+ } else if ((too_many_pipe_buffers_hard(pipe->user, nr_pages) ||
+ too_many_pipe_buffers_soft(pipe->user, nr_pages)) &&
!capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) &&
!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) {
ret = -EPERM;
Isn't there also a race where two or more concurrent pipe()/fnctl()
calls can together push us over the limits before the accounting is done?
I think there really ought to be a check after doing the accounting if
we really want to be meticulous here.
Thanks for fixing these and good catch!
Vegard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
