On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:00 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 08:01:37PM +0100, andrey.konovalov@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Print virtual mapping range and its creator in reports affecting virtual
> > mappings.
> >
> > Also get physical page pointer for such mappings, so page information
> > gets printed as well.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Note: no need to merge this patch into any of the KASAN vmalloc patches
> > that are already in mm, better to keep it separate.
> > ---
> > mm/kasan/report.c | 12 +++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/kasan/report.c b/mm/kasan/report.c
> > index 137c2c0b09db..8002fb3c417d 100644
> > --- a/mm/kasan/report.c
> > +++ b/mm/kasan/report.c
> > @@ -260,8 +260,18 @@ static void print_address_description(void *addr, u8 tag)
> > pr_err(" %pS\n", addr);
> > }
> >
> > + if (is_vmalloc_addr(addr)) {
> > + struct vm_struct *va = find_vm_area(addr);
> > +
> > + pr_err("The buggy address belongs to the virtual mapping at\n"
> > + " [%px, %px) created by:\n"
> > + " %pS\n", va->addr, va->addr + va->size, va->caller);
>
> The return value of find_vm_area() needs a NULL check here;
> is_vmalloc_addr(addr) just checks that `addr` is within the vmalloc VA
> range, and doesn't guarantee that there is a vmap_area associated with
> that `addr`.
>
> Without the NULL-check, we'll blow up on the `va->addr` dereference and
> will fail to make the report, which would be unfortunate.
Indeed. Will fix in v2. Thanks, Mark!
