> On Jan 9, 2023, at 10:07, Chuck Lever III <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jan 9, 2023, at 9:44 AM, Trond Myklebust <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 9, 2023, at 03:42, Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/01/2023 09:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 08/01/2023 18:09, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>>>>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 8, 2023, at 08:25, Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07/01/2023 16:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bisect identified commit 7fd461c47c6c ("NFSv4.2: Change the default
>>>>>>> KConfig value for READ_PLUS") as one leading to NULL pointer exception
>>>>>>> when mounting NFS root on NFSv4 client:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ 25.739003] systemd[1]: Set hostname to <odroidhc1>.
>>>>>>> [ 25.771714] systemd[1]: Failed to bump fs.file-max, ignoring: Invalid
>>>>>>> argument
>>>>>>> [ 26.199478] 8<--- cut here ---
>>>>>>> [ 26.201366] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
>>>>>>> virtual address 00000004
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> [ 26.555522] mmiocpy from xdr_inline_decode+0xec/0x16c
>>>>>>> [ 26.560628] xdr_inline_decode from nfs4_xdr_dec_read_plus+0x178/0x358
>>>>>>> [ 26.567130] nfs4_xdr_dec_read_plus from call_decode+0x204/0x304
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Full OOPS attached. Full log available here:
>>>>>>> https://krzk.eu/#/builders/21/builds/3901/steps/15/logs/serial0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Disabling NFS_V4_2_READ_PLUS fixes the issue, so obviously the commit is
>>>>>>> not the cause, but rather making it default caused the regression.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did not make the bisect yet which commit introduced it, if every
>>>>>>> config includes NFS_V4_2_READ_PLUS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When every kernel is built with NFS_V4_2_READ_PLUS, bisect pointed to:
>>>>>> d3b00a802c84 ("NFS: Replace the READ_PLUS decoding code")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> commit d3b00a802c845a6021148ce2e669b5a0b5729959
>>>>>> Author: Anna Schumaker <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Date: Thu Jul 21 14:21:34 2022 -0400
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NFS: Replace the READ_PLUS decoding code
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We now take a 2-step process that allows us to place data and hole
>>>>>> segments directly at their final position in the xdr_stream without
>>>>>> needing to do a bunch of redundant copies to expand holes. Due to the
>>>>>> variable lengths of each segment, the xdr metadata might cross page
>>>>>> boundaries which I account for by setting a small scratch buffer so
>>>>>> xdr_inline_decode() won't fail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Anna Schumaker <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With a trace:
>>>>>> [ 25.898462] systemd[1]: Set hostname to <odroidhc1>.
>>>>>> [ 25.933746] systemd[1]: Failed to bump fs.file-max, ignoring: Invalid
>>>>>> argument
>>>>>> [ 25.986237] random: crng init done
>>>>>> [ 26.264564] 8<--- cut here ---
>>>>>> [ 26.266823] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
>>>>>> virtual address 00000fe8
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> [ 26.597263] nfs4_xdr_dec_read_plus from call_decode+0x204/0x304
>>>>>> [ 26.603222] call_decode from __rpc_execute+0xd0/0x890
>>>>>> [ 26.608328] __rpc_execute from rpc_async_schedule+0x1c/0x34
>>>>>> [ 26.613960] rpc_async_schedule from process_one_work+0x294/0x790
>>>>>> [ 26.620030] process_one_work from worker_thread+0x54/0x518
>>>>>> [ 26.625570] worker_thread from kthread+0xf4/0x128
>>>>>> [ 26.630336] kthread from ret_from_fork+0x14/0x2c
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this test being run against a 6.2-rc2 server, or is it an older server platform? We know there were bugs in older server implementations, so the question is whether this might be a problem with handling a bad/corrupt RPC reply from the server, or whether it is happening against code that is supposed to have been fixed?
>>>>
>>>> I would say that buggy server should not cause NULL pointer dereferences
>>>> on the client. Otherwise this is a perfect recipe for a rogue server in
>>>> the network to start crashing clients and running exploits... Imagine a
>>>> compromised machine (through some other means) in a local company
>>>> network running now a server with NFS share "HR salary data" or "HR
>>>> planned layoffs", where unsuspected people in that network access it
>>>> leading to exploit of NFS code on their side...
>>>>
>>>> Server is Raspberry Pi 3 kernel: 5.10.92-2-rpi-legacy-ARCH
>>>>
>>>> Which points that it is not latest stable, so anyway I need to update.
>>>
>>> I updated the kernel to 5.15.84-3-rpi-ARCH which is pretty close to
>>> latest stable and I can reproduce the issue. Therefore:
>>> 1. It is visible on two stable (one new, one old) kernels on the server,
>>> 2. Buggy or rogue server should not cause NULL pointer on remote devices...
>>>
>>
>> The nfsd READ_PLUS code is borked up and until 6.2-rc1. I thought we had a server option to disable that code, but it seems as if that is not the case.
>> Chuck + Anna, can we please send a stable patch to rip out that code altogether from all the older versions? If we want to enable READ_PLUS by default on the client, then we cannot do so if the majority of NFSv4.2 servers out there are running a borked implementation.
>>
>> I do agree that we cannot allow buggy
>
> or malicious, or non-Linux,
>
>
>> servers to cause memory corruption in the client code, so I propose that we revert the Kconfig default setting change again until both the client code and the legacy servers have been fixed.
>
> I stand ready to receive and apply server-side fixes, as you suggested.
>
> However IMO it would be most responsible to go straight for a client code fix. The Kconfig setting is a red herring (as delicious as that might sound). Any thoughts about how difficult that fix might be?
>
A client fix is necessary, but not sufficient. The older server READ_PLUS code is slower than ordinary read for several filesystems, since it relies upon the (often poor) performance of lseek(SEEK_HOLE). Leaving legacy servers as is, would therefore still cause regressions for clients that default to trying READ_PLUS, even if the code is fixed to not Oops.
As for the client fix, I’m leaving that to Anna, since she owns the READ_PLUS feature. I stand ready to revert the Kconfig setting if these fixes cannot be made in the 6.2 time frame.
_________________________________
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
[email protected]