mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bug] pwritev02 hang on s390x with 4.8.0-rc7
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 16:06:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160920150657.GN2356@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57E131E6.1090507@redhat.com>

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 02:56:06PM +0200, Jan Stancek wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm hitting a regression with LTP's pwritev02 [1] on s390x with 4.8.0-rc7.
> Specifically the EFAULT case, which is passing an iovec with invalid base address:
>   #define CHUNK 64
>   static struct iovec wr_iovec3[] = {
>   	{(char *)-1, CHUNK},
>   };
> hangs with 100% cpu usage and not very helpful stack trace:
>   # cat /proc/28544/stack
>   [<0000000000001000>] 0x1000
>   [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
> 
> The problem starts with d4690f1e1cda "fix iov_iter_fault_in_readable()".
> 
> Before this commit fault_in_pages_readable() called __get_user() on start
> address which presumably failed with -EFAULT immediately.
> 
> With this commit applied fault_in_multipages_readable() appears to return 0
> for the case when "start" is invalid but "end" overflows. Then according to
> my traces we keep spinning inside while loop in iomap_write_actor().

Cute.  Let me see if I understand what's going on there: we have a wraparound
that would've been caught by most of access_ok(), but not on an architectures
where access_ok() is a no-op; in that case the loop is skipped and we
just check the last address, which passes and we get a false positive.
Bug is real and it's definitely -stable fodder.

I'm not sure that the fix you propose is right, though.  Note that ERR_PTR()
is not a valid address on any architecture, so any wraparound automatically
means -EFAULT and we can simply check unlikely(uaddr > end) and bugger off
if it holds.  while() turns into do-while(), of course, and the same is
needed for the read side.

Could you check if the following works for you?

diff --git a/include/linux/pagemap.h b/include/linux/pagemap.h
index 66a1260..7e3d537 100644
--- a/include/linux/pagemap.h
+++ b/include/linux/pagemap.h
@@ -571,56 +571,56 @@ static inline int fault_in_pages_readable(const char __user *uaddr, int size)
  */
 static inline int fault_in_multipages_writeable(char __user *uaddr, int size)
 {
-	int ret = 0;
 	char __user *end = uaddr + size - 1;
 
 	if (unlikely(size == 0))
-		return ret;
+		return 0;
 
+	if (unlikely(uaddr > end))
+		return -EFAULT;
 	/*
 	 * Writing zeroes into userspace here is OK, because we know that if
 	 * the zero gets there, we'll be overwriting it.
 	 */
-	while (uaddr <= end) {
-		ret = __put_user(0, uaddr);
-		if (ret != 0)
-			return ret;
+	do {
+		if (unlikely(__put_user(0, uaddr) != 0))
+			return -EFAULT;
 		uaddr += PAGE_SIZE;
-	}
+	} while (uaddr <= end);
 
 	/* Check whether the range spilled into the next page. */
 	if (((unsigned long)uaddr & PAGE_MASK) ==
 			((unsigned long)end & PAGE_MASK))
-		ret = __put_user(0, end);
+		return __put_user(0, end);
 
-	return ret;
+	return 0;
 }
 
 static inline int fault_in_multipages_readable(const char __user *uaddr,
 					       int size)
 {
 	volatile char c;
-	int ret = 0;
 	const char __user *end = uaddr + size - 1;
 
 	if (unlikely(size == 0))
-		return ret;
+		return 0;
 
-	while (uaddr <= end) {
-		ret = __get_user(c, uaddr);
-		if (ret != 0)
-			return ret;
+	if (unlikely(uaddr > end))
+		return -EFAULT;
+
+	do {
+		if (unlikely(__get_user(c, uaddr) != 0))
+			return -EFAULT;
 		uaddr += PAGE_SIZE;
-	}
+	} while (uaddr <= end);
 
 	/* Check whether the range spilled into the next page. */
 	if (((unsigned long)uaddr & PAGE_MASK) ==
 			((unsigned long)end & PAGE_MASK)) {
-		ret = __get_user(c, end);
-		(void)c;
+		return __get_user(c, end);
 	}
 
-	return ret;
+	return 0;
 }
 
 int add_to_page_cache_locked(struct page *page, struct address_space *mapping,

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-20 15:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-20 12:56 Jan Stancek
2016-09-20 15:06 ` Al Viro [this message]
2016-09-20 17:11   ` Jan Stancek
2016-09-20 17:30     ` Al Viro
2016-09-20 19:07     ` [PATCH] fix fault_in_multipages_...() on architectures with no-op access_ok() Al Viro
2016-09-20 20:24       ` Linus Torvalds
2016-09-20 20:38         ` Al Viro
2016-09-20 20:48           ` Linus Torvalds
2016-09-20 21:03             ` Al Viro
2016-09-20 21:37               ` Al Viro
2016-09-20 23:43               ` Linus Torvalds
2016-09-21  0:38                 ` Al Viro

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160920150657.GN2356@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome