On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 02:24:25PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: > On 14 June 2018 at 12:04, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:48:50PM -0300, Rafael Tinoco wrote: > >> On 13 June 2018 at 18:08, Rafael David Tinoco > >> <rafaeldtinoco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 6:00 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > >> > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 05:47:49PM -0300, Rafael Tinoco wrote: > >> >>> Results from Linaro’s test farm. > >> >>> Regressions detected. > >> >>> > >> >>> NOTE: > >> >>> > >> >>> 1) LTP vma03 test (cve-2011-2496) broken on v4.4-137-rc1 because of: > >> >>> > >> >>> 6ea1dc96a03a mmap: relax file size limit for regular files > >> >>> bd2f9ce5bacb mmap: introduce sane default mmap limits > >> >>> > >> >>> discussion: > >> >>> > >> >>> https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/341 > >> >>> > >> >>> mainline commit (v4.13-rc7): > >> >>> > >> >>> 0cc3b0ec23ce Clarify (and fix) MAX_LFS_FILESIZE macros > >> >>> > >> >>> should be backported to 4.4.138-rc2 and fixes the issue. > >> >> > >> >> Really? That commit says it fixes c2a9737f45e2 ("vfs,mm: fix a dead > >> >> loop in truncate_inode_pages_range()") which is not in 4.4.y at all. > >> >> > >> >> Did you test this out? > >> > > >> > Yes, the LTP contains the tests (last comment is the final test for > >> > arm32, right before Jan tests i686). > >> > > >> > Fixing MAX_LFS_FILESIZE fixes the new limit for mmap() brought by > >> > those 2 commits (file_mmap_size_max()). > >> > offset tested by the LTP test is 0xfffffffe000. > >> > file_mmap_size_max gives: 0xFFFFFFFF000 as max value, but only after > >> > the mentioned patch. > >> > > >> > Original intent for this fix was other though. > >> > >> To clarify this a bit further. > >> > >> The LTP CVE test is breaking in the first call to mmap(), even before > >> trying to remap and test the security issue. That start happening in > >> this round because of those mmap() changes and the offset used in the > >> LTP test. Linus changed limit checks and made them to be related to > >> MAX_LFS_FILESIZE. Unfortunately, in 4.4 stable, we were missing the > >> fix for MAX_LFS_FILESIZE (which before commit 0cc3b0ec23ce was less > >> than the REAL 32 bit limit). > >> > >> Commit 0cc3b0ec23ce was made because an user noticed the FS limit not > >> being what it should be. In our case, the 4.4 stable kernel, we are > >> facing this 32 bit lower limit (than the real 32 bit real limit), > >> because of the LTP CVE test, so we need this fix to have the real 32 > >> bit limit set for that macro (mmap limits did not use that macro > >> before). > >> > >> I have tested in arm32 and Jan Stancek, who first responded to LTP > >> issue, has tested this in i686 and both worked after that patch was > >> included to v4.4-137-rc1 (my last test was even with 4.4.138-rc1). > >> > >> Hope that helps a bit. > > > > Ok, thanks, it didn't apply cleanly but I've fixed it up now. > > On the latest 4.4.138-rc1, > LTP "cve-2011-2496" test still fails on arm32 beagleboard x15 and qemu_arm. > > Summary > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > kernel: 4.4.138-rc1 > git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git > git branch: linux-4.4.y > git commit: 7d690c56754ef7be647fbcf7bcdceebd59926b3f > git describe: v4.4.137-15-g7d690c56754e > Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.137-15-g7d690c56754e Ok, but what does this mean? Is there a commit somewhere that I need to pick up for 4.4.y that is already in newer kernels? I have no idea what that cve is, as I never track them, and it's something that was reported to predate the 4.4 kernel release :) thanks, greg k-h
