lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: mempool: Fix a possible sleep-in-atomic-context bug in mempool_resize()
From
Date


On 2018/6/21 11:38, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:07:14AM +0800, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
>> The kernel may sleep with holding a spinlock.
>> The function call path (from bottom to top) in Linux-4.16.7 is:
>>
>> [FUNC] remove_element(GFP_KERNEL)
>> mm/mempool.c, 250: remove_element in mempool_resize
>> mm/mempool.c, 247: _raw_spin_lock_irqsave in mempool_resize
>>
>> To fix this bug, GFP_KERNEL is replaced with GFP_ATOMIC.
>>
>> This bug is found by my static analysis tool (DSAC-2) and checked by
>> my code review.
> But ... we don't use the flags argument.
>
> static void *remove_element(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t flags)
> {
> void *element = pool->elements[--pool->curr_nr];
>
> BUG_ON(pool->curr_nr < 0);
> kasan_unpoison_element(pool, element, flags);
> check_element(pool, element);
> return element;
> }
>
> ...
>
> static void kasan_unpoison_element(mempool_t *pool, void *element, gfp_t flags)
> {
> if (pool->alloc == mempool_alloc_slab || pool->alloc == mempool_kmalloc)
> kasan_unpoison_slab(element);
> if (pool->alloc == mempool_alloc_pages)
> kasan_alloc_pages(element, (unsigned long)pool->pool_data);
> }
>
> So the correct patch would just remove this argument to remove_element() and
> kasan_unpoison_element()?

Yes, I also find this.
I can submit a patch that removes the flag in:
Definitions of kasan_unpoison_element() and remove_element()
Three calls to remove_element() and one call to kasan_unpoison_element()
in mempool.c.

Do you think it is okay?


Best wishes,
Jia-Ju Bai

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-21 05:47    [W:0.059 / U:1.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site