syzbot found WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask()[1] when order >= MAX_ORDER.
It was caused by __netdev_alloc_skb(), which doesn't check len value after adding NET_SKB_PAD.
Order will be >= MAX_ORDER and passed to __alloc_pages_nodemask() if size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.
static void *kmalloc_large_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node)
{
struct page *page;
void *ptr = NULL;
unsigned int order = get_order(size);
...
page = alloc_pages_node(node, flags, order);
...
[1] WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x5f8/0x730 mm/page_alloc.c:5014
Call Trace:
__alloc_pages include/linux/gfp.h:511 [inline]
__alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:524 [inline]
alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:538 [inline]
kmalloc_large_node+0x60/0x110 mm/slub.c:3999
__kmalloc_node_track_caller+0x319/0x3f0 mm/slub.c:4496
__kmalloc_reserve net/core/skbuff.c:150 [inline]
__alloc_skb+0x4e4/0x5a0 net/core/skbuff.c:210
__netdev_alloc_skb+0x70/0x400 net/core/skbuff.c:446
netdev_alloc_skb include/linux/skbuff.h:2832 [inline]
qrtr_endpoint_post+0x84/0x11b0 net/qrtr/qrtr.c:442
qrtr_tun_write_iter+0x11f/0x1a0 net/qrtr/tun.c:98
call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:1901 [inline]
new_sync_write+0x426/0x650 fs/read_write.c:518
vfs_write+0x791/0xa30 fs/read_write.c:605
ksys_write+0x12d/0x250 fs/read_write.c:658
do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x70 arch/x86/entry/common.c:46
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
Reported-by: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Pavel Skripkin <[email protected]>
Change-Id: I480a6d6f818a4c0a387db0cd3f230b68a7daeb16
---
net/core/skbuff.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
index 785daff48030..dc28c8f7bf5f 100644
--- a/net/core/skbuff.c
+++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
@@ -443,6 +443,9 @@ struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int len,
if (len <= SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024) ||
len > SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(PAGE_SIZE) ||
(gfp_mask & (__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | GFP_DMA))) {
+ if (len > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE)
+ return NULL;
+
skb = __alloc_skb(len, gfp_mask, SKB_ALLOC_RX, NUMA_NO_NODE);
if (!skb)
goto skb_fail;
--
2.25.1
From: Pavel Skripkin <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:11:06 +0300
Hi,
> syzbot found WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask()[1] when order >= MAX_ORDER.
> It was caused by __netdev_alloc_skb(), which doesn't check len value after adding NET_SKB_PAD.
> Order will be >= MAX_ORDER and passed to __alloc_pages_nodemask() if size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.
>
> static void *kmalloc_large_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node)
> {
> struct page *page;
> void *ptr = NULL;
> unsigned int order = get_order(size);
> ...
> page = alloc_pages_node(node, flags, order);
> ...
>
> [1] WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x5f8/0x730 mm/page_alloc.c:5014
> Call Trace:
> __alloc_pages include/linux/gfp.h:511 [inline]
> __alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:524 [inline]
> alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:538 [inline]
> kmalloc_large_node+0x60/0x110 mm/slub.c:3999
> __kmalloc_node_track_caller+0x319/0x3f0 mm/slub.c:4496
> __kmalloc_reserve net/core/skbuff.c:150 [inline]
> __alloc_skb+0x4e4/0x5a0 net/core/skbuff.c:210
> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x70/0x400 net/core/skbuff.c:446
> netdev_alloc_skb include/linux/skbuff.h:2832 [inline]
> qrtr_endpoint_post+0x84/0x11b0 net/qrtr/qrtr.c:442
> qrtr_tun_write_iter+0x11f/0x1a0 net/qrtr/tun.c:98
> call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:1901 [inline]
> new_sync_write+0x426/0x650 fs/read_write.c:518
> vfs_write+0x791/0xa30 fs/read_write.c:605
> ksys_write+0x12d/0x250 fs/read_write.c:658
> do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x70 arch/x86/entry/common.c:46
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>
> Reported-by: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Skripkin <[email protected]>
> Change-Id: I480a6d6f818a4c0a387db0cd3f230b68a7daeb16
> ---
> net/core/skbuff.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> index 785daff48030..dc28c8f7bf5f 100644
> --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> @@ -443,6 +443,9 @@ struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int len,
> if (len <= SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024) ||
> len > SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(PAGE_SIZE) ||
> (gfp_mask & (__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | GFP_DMA))) {
> + if (len > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE)
> + return NULL;
I'd use unlikely() for this as it's very very rare condition on the
very hot path.
Also, I'd add the same check below into __napi_alloc_skb() as it has
the same fallback.
> skb = __alloc_skb(len, gfp_mask, SKB_ALLOC_RX, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> if (!skb)
> goto skb_fail;
> --
> 2.25.1
Thanks,
Al
On 2/26/21 8:11 PM, Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> syzbot found WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask()[1] when order >= MAX_ORDER.
> It was caused by __netdev_alloc_skb(), which doesn't check len value after adding NET_SKB_PAD.
> Order will be >= MAX_ORDER and passed to __alloc_pages_nodemask() if size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.
>
> static void *kmalloc_large_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node)
> {
> struct page *page;
> void *ptr = NULL;
> unsigned int order = get_order(size);
> ...
> page = alloc_pages_node(node, flags, order);
> ...
>
> [1] WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x5f8/0x730 mm/page_alloc.c:5014
> Call Trace:
> __alloc_pages include/linux/gfp.h:511 [inline]
> __alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:524 [inline]
> alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:538 [inline]
> kmalloc_large_node+0x60/0x110 mm/slub.c:3999
> __kmalloc_node_track_caller+0x319/0x3f0 mm/slub.c:4496
> __kmalloc_reserve net/core/skbuff.c:150 [inline]
> __alloc_skb+0x4e4/0x5a0 net/core/skbuff.c:210
> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x70/0x400 net/core/skbuff.c:446
> netdev_alloc_skb include/linux/skbuff.h:2832 [inline]
> qrtr_endpoint_post+0x84/0x11b0 net/qrtr/qrtr.c:442
> qrtr_tun_write_iter+0x11f/0x1a0 net/qrtr/tun.c:98
> call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:1901 [inline]
> new_sync_write+0x426/0x650 fs/read_write.c:518
> vfs_write+0x791/0xa30 fs/read_write.c:605
> ksys_write+0x12d/0x250 fs/read_write.c:658
> do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x70 arch/x86/entry/common.c:46
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>
> Reported-by: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Skripkin <[email protected]>
> Change-Id: I480a6d6f818a4c0a387db0cd3f230b68a7daeb16
> ---
> net/core/skbuff.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> index 785daff48030..dc28c8f7bf5f 100644
> --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> @@ -443,6 +443,9 @@ struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int len,
> if (len <= SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024) ||
> len > SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(PAGE_SIZE) ||
> (gfp_mask & (__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | GFP_DMA))) {
> + if (len > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE)
> + return NULL;
> +
> skb = __alloc_skb(len, gfp_mask, SKB_ALLOC_RX, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> if (!skb)
> goto skb_fail;
>
No, please fix the offender instead.
Offender tentative fix was in
commit 2a80c15812372e554474b1dba0b1d8e467af295d
Author: Sabyrzhan Tasbolatov <[email protected]>
Date: Tue Feb 2 15:20:59 2021 +0600
net/qrtr: restrict user-controlled length in qrtr_tun_write_iter()
qrtr maintainers have to tell us what is the maximum datagram length they need to support.
Hi, thanks for your reply!
On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 14:09 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> On 2/26/21 8:11 PM, Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> > syzbot found WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask()[1] when order >=
> > MAX_ORDER.
> > It was caused by __netdev_alloc_skb(), which doesn't check len
> > value after adding NET_SKB_PAD.
> > Order will be >= MAX_ORDER and passed to __alloc_pages_nodemask()
> > if size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.
> >
> > static void *kmalloc_large_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node)
> > {
> > struct page *page;
> > void *ptr = NULL;
> > unsigned int order = get_order(size);
> > ...
> > page = alloc_pages_node(node, flags, order);
> > ...
> >
> > [1] WARNING in __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x5f8/0x730
> > mm/page_alloc.c:5014
> > Call Trace:
> > __alloc_pages include/linux/gfp.h:511 [inline]
> > __alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:524 [inline]
> > alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:538 [inline]
> > kmalloc_large_node+0x60/0x110 mm/slub.c:3999
> > __kmalloc_node_track_caller+0x319/0x3f0 mm/slub.c:4496
> > __kmalloc_reserve net/core/skbuff.c:150 [inline]
> > __alloc_skb+0x4e4/0x5a0 net/core/skbuff.c:210
> > __netdev_alloc_skb+0x70/0x400 net/core/skbuff.c:446
> > netdev_alloc_skb include/linux/skbuff.h:2832 [inline]
> > qrtr_endpoint_post+0x84/0x11b0 net/qrtr/qrtr.c:442
> > qrtr_tun_write_iter+0x11f/0x1a0 net/qrtr/tun.c:98
> > call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:1901 [inline]
> > new_sync_write+0x426/0x650 fs/read_write.c:518
> > vfs_write+0x791/0xa30 fs/read_write.c:605
> > ksys_write+0x12d/0x250 fs/read_write.c:658
> > do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x70 arch/x86/entry/common.c:46
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> >
> > Reported-by: [email protected]
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Skripkin <[email protected]>
> > Change-Id: I480a6d6f818a4c0a387db0cd3f230b68a7daeb16
> > ---
> > net/core/skbuff.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > index 785daff48030..dc28c8f7bf5f 100644
> > --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> > +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > @@ -443,6 +443,9 @@ struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct
> > net_device *dev, unsigned int len,
> > if (len <= SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024) ||
> > len > SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(PAGE_SIZE) ||
> > (gfp_mask & (__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | GFP_DMA))) {
> > + if (len > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > skb = __alloc_skb(len, gfp_mask, SKB_ALLOC_RX,
> > NUMA_NO_NODE);
> > if (!skb)
> > goto skb_fail;
> >
>
>
> No, please fix the offender instead.
Yesterday I already send newer patch version to Alexander Lobakin,
where I added __GFP_NOWARN in qrtr_endpoint_post(). I think, You can
check it in this thread.
>
> Offender tentative fix was in
>
> commit 2a80c15812372e554474b1dba0b1d8e467af295d
> Author: Sabyrzhan Tasbolatov <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue Feb 2 15:20:59 2021 +0600
>
> net/qrtr: restrict user-controlled length in
> qrtr_tun_write_iter()
>
This patch fixes kzalloc() call, but the warning was caused by
__netdev_alloc_skb().
>
> qrtr maintainers have to tell us what is the maximum datagram length
> they need to support.
>
>
>
With regards,
Pavel Skripkin