[merged] mm-oom-fix-use-after-free-in-oom_kill_process.patch removed from -mm tree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



The patch titled
     Subject: mm, oom: fix use-after-free in oom_kill_process
has been removed from the -mm tree.  Its filename was
     mm-oom-fix-use-after-free-in-oom_kill_process.patch

This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree

------------------------------------------------------
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: mm, oom: fix use-after-free in oom_kill_process

Syzbot instance running on upstream kernel found a use-after-free bug in
oom_kill_process.  On further inspection it seems like the process
selected to be oom-killed has exited even before reaching
read_lock(&tasklist_lock) in oom_kill_process().  More specifically the
tsk->usage is 1 which is due to get_task_struct() in oom_evaluate_task()
and the put_task_struct within for_each_thread() frees the tsk and
for_each_thread() tries to access the tsk.  The easiest fix is to do
get/put across the for_each_thread() on the selected task.

Now the next question is should we continue with the oom-kill as the
previously selected task has exited?  However before adding more
complexity and heuristics, let's answer why we even look at the children
of oom-kill selected task?  The select_bad_process() has already selected
the worst process in the system/memcg.  Due to race, the selected process
might not be the worst at the kill time but does that matter?  The
userspace can use the oom_score_adj interface to prefer children to be
killed before the parent.  I looked at the history but it seems like this
is there before git history.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190121215850.221745-1-shakeelb@xxxxxxxxxx
Reported-by: syzbot+7fbbfa368521945f0e3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fixes: 6b0c81b3be11 ("mm, oom: reduce dependency on tasklist_lock")
Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

 mm/oom_kill.c |    8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

--- a/mm/oom_kill.c~mm-oom-fix-use-after-free-in-oom_kill_process
+++ a/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -975,6 +975,13 @@ static void oom_kill_process(struct oom_
 	 * still freeing memory.
 	 */
 	read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+
+	/*
+	 * The task 'p' might have already exited before reaching here. The
+	 * put_task_struct() will free task_struct 'p' while the loop still try
+	 * to access the field of 'p', so, get an extra reference.
+	 */
+	get_task_struct(p);
 	for_each_thread(p, t) {
 		list_for_each_entry(child, &t->children, sibling) {
 			unsigned int child_points;
@@ -994,6 +1001,7 @@ static void oom_kill_process(struct oom_
 			}
 		}
 	}
+	put_task_struct(p);
 	read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
 
 	/*
_

Patches currently in -mm which might be from shakeelb@xxxxxxxxxx are

memcg-localize-memcg_kmem_enabled-check.patch
memcg-schedule-high-reclaim-for-remote-memcgs-on-high_work.patch
memcg-schedule-high-reclaim-for-remote-memcgs-on-high_work-v3.patch
mm-oom-remove-prefer-children-over-parent-heuristic.patch




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Archive]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux