On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:56:05AM -0800, Wengang wrote: > > > On 11/19/2017 05:50 PM, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > >On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:56:21PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > >>On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:30 PM, Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>Kasan advanced check, I'm going to add this feature. > >>>Currently Kasan provide the detection of use-after-free and out-of-bounds > >>>problems. It is not able to find the overwrite-on-allocated-memory issue. > >>>We sometimes hit this kind of issue: We have a messed up structure > >>>(usually dynamially allocated), some of the fields in the structure were > >>>overwritten with unreasaonable values. And kernel may panic due to those > >>>overeritten values. We know those fields were overwritten somehow, but we > >>>have no easy way to find out which path did the overwritten. The advanced > >>>check wants to help in this scenario. > >>> > >>>The idea is to define the memory owner. When write accesses come from > >>>non-owner, error should be reported. Normally the write accesses on a given > >>>structure happen in only several or a dozen of functions if the structure > >>>is not that complicated. We call those functions "allowed functions". > >>>The work of defining the owner and binding memory to owner is expected to > >>>be done by the memory consumer. In the above case, memory consume register > >>>the owner as the functions which have write accesses to the structure then > >>>bind all the structures to the owner. Then kasan will do the "owner check" > >>>after the basic checks. > >>> > >>>As implementation, kasan provides a API to it's user to register their > >>>allowed functions. The API returns a token to users. At run time, users > >>>bind the memory ranges they are interested in to the check they registered. > >>>Kasan then checks the bound memory ranges with the allowed functions. > >>> > >>> > >>>Signed-off-by: Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> > >Hello, Wengang. > > > >Nice idea. I also think that we need this kind of debugging tool. It's very > >hard to detect overwritten bugs. > > > >In fact, I made a quite similar tool, valid access checker (A.K.A. > >vchecker). See the following link. > > > >https://github.com/JoonsooKim/linux/tree/vchecker-master-v0.3-next-20170106 > > > >Vchecker has some advanced features compared to yours. > > > >1. Target object can be choosen at runtime by debugfs. It doesn't > >require re-compile to register the target object. > Hi Joonsoo, good to know you are also interested in this! > > Yes, if can be choosen via debugfs, it doesn't need re-compile. > Well, I wonder what do you expect to be chosen from use space? As you mentioned somewhere, this tool can be used when we find the overwritten happend on some particular victims. I assumes that most of the problem would happen on slab objects and userspace can choose the target slab cache via debugfs interface of the vchecker. > > > > >2. It has another feature that checks the value stored in the object. > >Usually, invalid writer stores odd value into the object and vchecker > >can detect this case. > It's good to do the check. Well, as I understand, it tells something > bad (overwitten) happened. > But it can't tell who did the overwritten, right? (I didn't look at > your patch yet,) do you recall the last write somewhere? Yes, it stores the callstack of the last write and report it when the error is found. > > > > >3. It has a callstack checker (memory owner checker in yours). It > >checks all the callstack rather than just the caller. It's important > >since invalid writer could call the parent function of owner function > >and it would not be catched by checking just the caller. > > > >4. The callstack checker is more automated. vchecker collects the valid > >callstack by running the system. > I think we can merge the above two into one. > So you are doing full stack check. Well, finding out the all the > paths which have the write access may be not a very easy thing. > Missing some paths may cause dmesg flooding, and those log won't > help at all. Finding out all the (owning) caller only is relatively > much easier. Vchecker can be easily modified to store only the caller. It just requires modifying callstack depth parameter so it's so easy. Moreover, it can be accomplished by adding debugfs interface. Anyway, I don't think that finding out all the (owning) caller only is much easier. Think about dentry or inode object. It is accessed by various code path and it's not easy to cover all the owning caller by manual approach. > There do is the case you pointed out here. In this case, the > debugger can make slight change to the calling path. And as I > understand, > most of the overwritten are happening in quite different call paths, > they are not calling the (owning) caller. Agreed. > > > > >FYI, I attach some commit descriptions of the vchecker. > > > > vchecker: store/report callstack of value writer > > The purpose of the value checker is finding invalid user writing > > invalid value at the moment that the value is written. However, there is > > a missing infrastructure that passes writing value to the checker > > since we temporarilly piggyback on the KASAN. So, we cannot easily > > detect this case in time. > > However, by following way, we can emulate similar effect. > > 1. Store callstack when memory is written. > > Oh, seems you are storing the callstack for each write. -- I am not > sure if that would too heavy. Unlike KASAN that checks all type of the objects, this debugging feature is only enabled on the specific type of the objects so overhead would not be too heavy in terms of system overall performance. > Actually I was thinking to have a check on the new value. But seems > compiler doesn't provide that. Yes, look like we have a similar idea. I have some another ideas if ASAN hook provides the value to be written. However, it's not supported by compiler yet. > > 2. If check is failed in next access, report previous write-access > > callstack > > It will caught offending user properly. > > Following output "Call trace: Invalid writer" part is the result > > of this patch. We find the invalid value at workfn+0x71 but report > > writer at workfn+0x61. > > [ 133.024076] ================================================================== > > [ 133.025576] BUG: VCHECKER: invalid access in workfn+0x71/0xc0 at addr ffff8800683dd6c8 > > [ 133.027196] Read of size 8 by task kworker/1:1/48 > > [ 133.028020] 0x8 0x10 value > > [ 133.028020] 0xffff 4 > > [ 133.028020] Call trace: Invalid writer > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff81043b1b>] save_stack_trace+0x1b/0x20 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff812c0db9>] save_stack+0x39/0x70 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff812c0fe3>] check_value+0x43/0x80 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff812c1762>] vchecker_check+0x1c2/0x380 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff812be49d>] __asan_store8+0x8d/0xc0 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff815eadd1>] workfn+0x61/0xc0 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff810be3df>] process_one_work+0x28f/0x680 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff810bf272>] worker_thread+0xa2/0x870 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff810c86a5>] kthread+0x195/0x1e0 > > [ 133.028020] > > [ 133.028020] [<ffffffff81b9d3d2>] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30 > > [ 133.028020] CPU: 1 PID: 48 Comm: kworker/1:1 Not tainted 4.10.0-rc2-next-20170106+ #1179 > > [ 133.028020] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011 > > [ 133.028020] Workqueue: events workfn > > [ 133.028020] Call Trace: > > [ 133.028020] dump_stack+0x4d/0x63 > > [ 133.028020] kasan_object_err+0x21/0x80 > > [ 133.028020] vchecker_check+0x2af/0x380 > > [ 133.028020] ? workfn+0x71/0xc0 > > [ 133.028020] ? workfn+0x71/0xc0 > > [ 133.028020] __asan_load8+0x87/0xb0 > > [ 133.028020] workfn+0x71/0xc0 > > [ 133.028020] process_one_work+0x28f/0x680 > > [ 133.028020] worker_thread+0xa2/0x870 > > [ 133.028020] kthread+0x195/0x1e0 > > [ 133.028020] ? put_pwq_unlocked+0xc0/0xc0 > > [ 133.028020] ? kthread_park+0xd0/0xd0 > > [ 133.028020] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30 > > [ 133.028020] Object at ffff8800683dd6c0, in cache vchecker_test size: 24 > > [ 133.028020] Allocated: > > [ 133.028020] PID = 48 > > > > > > vchecker: Add 'callstack' checker > > The callstack checker is to find invalid code paths accessing to a > > certain field in an object. Currently it only saves all stack traces at > > the given offset. Reporting will be added in the next patch. > > The below example checks callstack of anon_vma: > > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/vchecker > > # echo 0 8 > anon_vma/callstack # offset 0, size 8 > > # echo 1 > anon_vma/enable > an echo "anon_vma" > <something> first? > How do you define and path the valid (owning) full stack to kasan? This interface only enables to store all the callstacks. No validation check here. I think that this feature would also be helpful to debug. If error happens, we can check all the previous callstacks and track the buggy caller. > > # cat anon_vma/callstack # show saved callstacks > > 0x0 0x8 callstack > > total: 42 > > callstack #0 > > anon_vma_fork+0x101/0x280 > > copy_process.part.10+0x15ff/0x2a40 > > _do_fork+0x155/0x7d0 > > SyS_clone+0x19/0x20 > > do_syscall_64+0xdf/0x460 > > return_from_SYSCALL_64+0x0/0x7a > > ... > > > > > > vchecker: Support toggle on/off of callstack check > > By default, callstack checker only collects callchains. When a user > > writes 'on' to the callstack file in debugfs, it checks and reports new > > callstacks. Writing 'off' to disable it again. > > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/vchecker > > # echo 0 8 > anon_vma/callstack > > # echo 1 > anon_vma/enable > > ... (do some work to collect enough callstacks) ... > How to define "enough" here? The bug usually doesn't happen immediately since it usually happens on the corner case. When debugging, we run the workload that causes the bug and then wait for some time until the bug happens. "Enough" can be defined as the middle of this waiting time. After some warm-up time, all the common callstack would be collected. Then, switching on this feature that reports a new callstack. If the corner case that is on a new callstack happens, this new callstack will be reported and we can check whether it is a true bug or not. > > # echo on > anon_vma/callstack > > > >The reason I didn't submit the vchecker to mainline is that I didn't find > >the case that this tool is useful in real life. Most of the system broken case > >can be debugged by other ways. Do you see the real case that this tool is > >helpful? If so, I think that vchecker is more appropriate to be upstreamed. > >Could you share your opinion? > Yes, people find other ways to solve overwritten issue (so did I) in > the past. If kasan doesn't provide this functionality, developers > have no way to choose it. > Though people have other ways to find the root cause, the other ways > maybe take (maybe much) longer. I didn't solve problems with the > owner check yet since I just make available recently. But > considering the overwritten issues I have ever hit, the owner check > definitely helps and I definitely will try the owner check when I > have a new overwritten issue! > > Why not send your patch for review? Okay! I hope to find more people that have interest on this feature and it seems that you are the one of them. :) I will send my patches soon. I think that we can be cooperative to improve this feature. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
