lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [patch V2 28/29] x86/irq/64: Remap the IRQ stack with guard pages
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 3:44 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 6 Apr 2019, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 8:11 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
> > >
> > > The IRQ stack lives in percpu space, so an IRQ handler that overflows it
> > > will overwrite other data structures.
> > >
> > > Use vmap() to remap the IRQ stack so that it will have the usual guard
> > > pages that vmap/vmalloc allocations have. With this the kernel will panic
> > > immediately on an IRQ stack overflow.
> >
> > The 0day bot noticed that this dies with DEBUG_PAGEALLOC on. This is
> > because the store_stackinfo() function is utter garbage and this patch
> > correctly detects just how broken it is. The attached patch "fixes"
> > it. (It also contains a reliability improvement that should probably
> > get folded in, but is otherwise unrelated.)
> >
> > A real fix would remove the generic kstack_end() function entirely
> > along with __HAVE_ARCH_KSTACK_END and would optionally replace
> > store_stackinfo() with something useful. Josh, do we have a generic
> > API to do a little stack walk like this? Otherwise, I don't think it
> > would be the end of the world to just remove the offending code.
>
> Actually we have: save_stack_trace()
>

Like I did here:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git/log/?h=WIP.x86/stackguards

(Link is bad right now but will hopefully be okay when you read it.
I'm still fiddling with the other patches in there -- I'd like to kill
kstack_end() entirely.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-08 04:24    [W:0.086 / U:24.564 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site