diff mbox series

[v2,14/18] lib/test_lockup: fix kernel pointer check for separate address spaces

Message ID 20220216131332.1489939-15-arnd@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series clean up asm/uaccess.h, kill set_fs for good | expand

Commit Message

Arnd Bergmann Feb. 16, 2022, 1:13 p.m. UTC 
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

test_kernel_ptr() uses access_ok() to figure out if a given address
points to user space instead of kernel space. However on architectures
that set CONFIG_ALTERNATE_USER_ADDRESS_SPACE, a pointer can be valid
for both, and the check always fails because access_ok() returns true.

Make the check for user space pointers conditional on the type of
address space layout.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
 lib/test_lockup.c | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Christoph Hellwig Feb. 18, 2022, 6:35 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 02:13:28PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> test_kernel_ptr() uses access_ok() to figure out if a given address
> points to user space instead of kernel space. However on architectures
> that set CONFIG_ALTERNATE_USER_ADDRESS_SPACE, a pointer can be valid
> for both, and the check always fails because access_ok() returns true.
> 
> Make the check for user space pointers conditional on the type of
> address space layout.

What is this code even trying to do?  It looks extremly broken.
Arnd Bergmann Feb. 18, 2022, 7:15 a.m. UTC | #2 
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 7:35 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 02:13:28PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> >
> > test_kernel_ptr() uses access_ok() to figure out if a given address
> > points to user space instead of kernel space. However on architectures
> > that set CONFIG_ALTERNATE_USER_ADDRESS_SPACE, a pointer can be valid
> > for both, and the check always fails because access_ok() returns true.
> >
> > Make the check for user space pointers conditional on the type of
> > address space layout.
>
> What is this code even trying to do?  It looks extremly broken.

As I understand it, this is only meant for debugging, and the module contains
intentionally broken lock usage to test whether the watchdog and lockup
detection in the kernel is able to find them.

I did not try that hard to understand how it works though.

      Arnd
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/lib/test_lockup.c b/lib/test_lockup.c
index 6a0f329a794a..c3fd87d6c2dd 100644
--- a/lib/test_lockup.c
+++ b/lib/test_lockup.c
@@ -417,9 +417,14 @@  static bool test_kernel_ptr(unsigned long addr, int size)
 		return false;
 
 	/* should be at least readable kernel address */
-	if (access_ok((void __user *)ptr, 1) ||
-	    access_ok((void __user *)ptr + size - 1, 1) ||
-	    get_kernel_nofault(buf, ptr) ||
+	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ALTERNATE_USER_ADDRESS_SPACE) &&
+	    (access_ok((void __user *)ptr, 1) ||
+	     access_ok((void __user *)ptr + size - 1, 1))) {
+		pr_err("user space ptr invalid in kernel: %#lx\n", addr);
+		return true;
+	}
+
+	if (get_kernel_nofault(buf, ptr) ||
 	    get_kernel_nofault(buf, ptr + size - 1)) {
 		pr_err("invalid kernel ptr: %#lx\n", addr);
 		return true;