On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 02:12:38PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 09:51:42AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 08:11:46AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > A test case to reproduce a filestream/MRU use-after-free of a
> > > reclaimed inode requires bits (e.g., ip->i_mount) of the inode to be
> > > reset/reused once the inode memory is freed. This normally only
> > > occurs when a new page is cycled into the zone, however.
> > >
> > > Perform the "one-time" inode init immediately prior to freeing
> > > inodes when in DEBUG mode. This will zero the inode, init the low
> > > level structures (locks, lists, etc.) and otherwise ensure each
> > > inode is in a purely uninitialized state while sitting in the zone
> > > as free memory.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > I'll post a test that depends on this once this is worked out... one
> > > concern this raised is if we consider any future bugs in the inode
> > > initialization code (suppose we initialize some field once that should
> > > be initialized on every allocation, for example), this code has the
> > > potential to suppress such problems in debug mode. So an alternative to
> > > this approach is to perhaps tie this to an errortag and let the
> > > associated xfstests test enable it appropriately. Thoughts or
> > > preferences?
> >
> > How about memset()ing the entire inode with a known poison value in
> > xfs_inode_free_callback and calling _init_once in xfs_inode_alloc
> > instead? That way it'll be obvious that someone touched a poisoned
> > (free) inode.
> >
>
> Ok... but note that doesn't address the concern above because we still
> effectively call _init_once() for every allocation. Essentially this
> means that if somebody screws up the idempotent nature of the
> init_once() fields or adds a new xfs_inode field and doesn't initialize
> it properly, the DEBUG mode kernel could suppress the problem by
> reinvoking the ctor for each allocation (where a !DEBUG kernel
> wouldn't). That's not a critical problem, but a bit of an annoying
> tradeoff since IMO a DEBUG kernel should be more likely to find such
> problems rather than hide them.
Or just add a new errortag to turn this behavior on? I think that'd be
useful at least for regression testing without requiring everyone to
test with KASAN kernels...
> But if nobody objects to that tradeoff, I'm fine with doing a memset()
> -> init_once() cycle as such instead of what this patch is doing. That
> is probably a more robust form of use-after-free detection after all.
> The minor tradeoff with the post-alloc init_once() approach is that we'd
> also potentially suppress failures of the kmem_cache code to call the
> ctor, but I suppose that's bound to fail spectacularly if that was ever
> a problem.
Probably. :)
--D
>
> Brian
>
> > --D
> >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c | 5 ++++-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_super.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_super.h | 1 +
> > > 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > > index 9a18f69f6e96..86dc4c8a4e1d 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > > @@ -111,7 +111,10 @@ xfs_inode_free_callback(
> > > xfs_inode_item_destroy(ip);
> > > ip->i_itemp = NULL;
> > > }
> > > -
> > > +#ifdef DEBUG
> > > + /* facilitate catching use-after-free problems */
> > > + xfs_fs_inode_init_once(ip);
> > > +#endif
> > > kmem_zone_free(xfs_inode_zone, ip);
> > > }
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > index 612c1d5348b3..29b1be5dfebf 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > @@ -1030,7 +1030,7 @@ xfs_fs_dirty_inode(
> > > * fields in the xfs inode that left in the initialise state
> > > * when freeing the inode.
> > > */
> > > -STATIC void
> > > +void
> > > xfs_fs_inode_init_once(
> > > void *inode)
> > > {
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.h b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.h
> > > index 8cee8e8050e3..aae8a778f378 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.h
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.h
> > > @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ struct block_device;
> > >
> > > extern void xfs_quiesce_attr(struct xfs_mount *mp);
> > > extern void xfs_flush_inodes(struct xfs_mount *mp);
> > > +extern void xfs_fs_inode_init_once(void *);
> > > extern void xfs_blkdev_issue_flush(struct xfs_buftarg *);
> > > extern xfs_agnumber_t xfs_set_inode_alloc(struct xfs_mount *,
> > > xfs_agnumber_t agcount);
> > > --
> > > 2.13.6
> > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
