On 07/15/14 12:18, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:37:56AM +0400, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>> On 07/15/14 10:04, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 03:30:08PM +0400, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>>> Some code in slub could validly touch memory marked by kasan as unaccessible.
>>>> Even though slub.c doesn't instrumented, functions called in it are instrumented,
>>>> so to avoid false positive reports such places are protected by
>>>> kasan_disable_local()/kasan_enable_local() calls.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> mm/slub.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
>>>> index 6ddedf9..c8dbea7 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/slub.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/slub.c
>>>> @@ -560,8 +560,10 @@ static void print_tracking(struct kmem_cache *s, void *object)
>>>> if (!(s->flags & SLAB_STORE_USER))
>>>> return;
>>>>
>>>> + kasan_disable_local();
>>>> print_track("Allocated", get_track(s, object, TRACK_ALLOC));
>>>> print_track("Freed", get_track(s, object, TRACK_FREE));
>>>> + kasan_enable_local();
>>>
>>> I don't think that this is needed since print_track() doesn't call
>>> external function with object pointer. print_track() call pr_err(), but,
>>> before calling, it retrieve t->addrs[i] so memory access only occurs
>>> in slub.c.
>>>
>> Agree.
>>
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> static void print_page_info(struct page *page)
>>>> @@ -604,6 +606,8 @@ static void print_trailer(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, u8 *p)
>>>> unsigned int off; /* Offset of last byte */
>>>> u8 *addr = page_address(page);
>>>>
>>>> + kasan_disable_local();
>>>> +
>>>> print_tracking(s, p);
>>>>
>>>> print_page_info(page);
>>>> @@ -632,6 +636,8 @@ static void print_trailer(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, u8 *p)
>>>> /* Beginning of the filler is the free pointer */
>>>> print_section("Padding ", p + off, s->size - off);
>>>>
>>>> + kasan_enable_local();
>>>> +
>>>> dump_stack();
>>>> }
>>>
>>> And, I recommend that you put this hook on right place.
>>> At a glance, the problematic function is print_section() which have
>>> external function call, print_hex_dump(), with object pointer.
>>> If you disable kasan in print_section, all the below thing won't be
>>> needed, I guess.
>>>
>>
>> Nope, at least memchr_inv() call in slab_pad_check will be a problem.
>>
>> I think putting disable/enable only where we strictly need them might be a problem for future maintenance of slub.
>> If someone is going to add a new function call somewhere, he must ensure that it this call won't be a problem
>> for kasan.
>
> I don't agree with this.
>
> If someone is going to add a slab_pad_check() in other places in
> slub.c, we should disable/enable kasan there, too. This looks same
> maintenance problem to me. Putting disable/enable only where we
> strictly need at least ensures that we don't need to care when using
> slub internal functions.
>
> And, if memchr_inv() is problem, I think that you also need to add hook
> into validate_slab_cache().
>
> validate_slab_cache() -> validate_slab_slab() -> validate_slab() ->
> check_object() -> check_bytes_and_report() -> memchr_inv()
>
> Thanks.
>
Ok, you convinced me. I'll do it.
--
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>