mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3.2 1/4] mm: do not grow the stack vma just because of an overrun on preceding vma
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:09:36 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <lsq.1498561776.914046816@decadent.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <lsq.1498561775.303580185@decadent.org.uk>

3.2.90-rc1 review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

commit 09884964335e85e897876d17783c2ad33cf8a2e0 upstream.

The stack vma is designed to grow automatically (marked with VM_GROWSUP
or VM_GROWSDOWN depending on architecture) when an access is made beyond
the existing boundary.  However, particularly if you have not limited
your stack at all ("ulimit -s unlimited"), this can cause the stack to
grow even if the access was really just one past *another* segment.

And that's wrong, especially since we first grow the segment, but then
immediately later enforce the stack guard page on the last page of the
segment.  So _despite_ first growing the stack segment as a result of
the access, the kernel will then make the access cause a SIGSEGV anyway!

So do the same logic as the guard page check does, and consider an
access to within one page of the next segment to be a bad access, rather
than growing the stack to abut the next segment.

Reported-and-tested-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
---
 mm/mmap.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

--- a/mm/mmap.c
+++ b/mm/mmap.c
@@ -1802,9 +1802,28 @@ int expand_downwards(struct vm_area_stru
 	return error;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Note how expand_stack() refuses to expand the stack all the way to
+ * abut the next virtual mapping, *unless* that mapping itself is also
+ * a stack mapping. We want to leave room for a guard page, after all
+ * (the guard page itself is not added here, that is done by the
+ * actual page faulting logic)
+ *
+ * This matches the behavior of the guard page logic (see mm/memory.c:
+ * check_stack_guard_page()), which only allows the guard page to be
+ * removed under these circumstances.
+ */
 #ifdef CONFIG_STACK_GROWSUP
 int expand_stack(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address)
 {
+	struct vm_area_struct *next;
+
+	address &= PAGE_MASK;
+	next = vma->vm_next;
+	if (next && next->vm_start == address + PAGE_SIZE) {
+		if (!(next->vm_flags & VM_GROWSUP))
+			return -ENOMEM;
+	}
 	return expand_upwards(vma, address);
 }
 
@@ -1827,6 +1846,14 @@ find_extend_vma(struct mm_struct *mm, un
 #else
 int expand_stack(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address)
 {
+	struct vm_area_struct *prev;
+
+	address &= PAGE_MASK;
+	prev = vma->vm_prev;
+	if (prev && prev->vm_end == address) {
+		if (!(prev->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN))
+			return -ENOMEM;
+	}
 	return expand_downwards(vma, address);
 }
 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-06-27 11:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-27 11:09 [PATCH 3.2 0/4] 3.2.90-rc1 review Ben Hutchings
2017-06-27 11:09 ` [PATCH 3.2 3/4] Allow stack to grow up to address space limit Ben Hutchings
2017-06-27 11:09 ` [PATCH 3.2 2/4] mm: larger stack guard gap, between vmas Ben Hutchings
2017-06-27 11:09 ` Ben Hutchings [this message]
2017-06-27 11:09 ` [PATCH 3.2 4/4] rxrpc: Fix several cases where a padded len isn't checked in ticket decode Ben Hutchings
2017-06-27 13:36 ` [PATCH 3.2 0/4] 3.2.90-rc1 review Guenter Roeck

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=lsq.1498561776.914046816@decadent.org.uk \
    --to=ben@decadent.org.uk \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®