On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Chen Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
> On some platforms, there is occasional panic triggered when trying to
> resume from hibernation, a typical panic looks like:
>
> "BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffff880085894000
> IP: [<ffffffff810c5dc2>] load_image_lzo+0x8c2/0xe70"
>
> Investigation carried out by Lee Chun-Yi show that this is because
> e820 map has been changed by BIOS across hibernation, and one
> of the page frames from suspend kernel is right located in restore
> kernel's unmapped region, so panic comes out when accessing unmapped
> kernel address.
>
> In order to expose this issue earlier, the md5 hash of e820 map
> is passed from suspend kernel to restore kernel, and the restore
> kernel will terminate the resume process once it finds the md5
> hash are not the same.
>
> As the format of image header has been modified, the magic number
> should also be adjusted as kernels with the same RESTORE_MAGIC have
> to use the same header format and interpret all of the fields in
> it in the same way.
>
> If the suspend kernel is built without md5 support, and the restore
> kernel has md5 support, then the latter will bypass the check process.
> Vice versa the restore kernel will bypass the check if it does not
> support md5 operation.
>
> Note:
> 1. Without this patch applied, it is possible that BIOS has
> provided an inconsistent memory map, but the resume kernel is still
> able to restore the image anyway(e.g, E820_RAM region is the superset
> of the previous one), although the system might be unstable. So this
> patch tries to treat any inconsistent e820 as illegal.
>
> 2. Another case is, this patch replies on comparing the e820_saved, but
> currently the e820_save might not be strictly the same across
> hibernation, even if BIOS has provided consistent e820 map - In
> theory mptable might modify the BIOS-provided e820_saved dynamically
> in early_reserve_e820_mpc_new, which would allocate a buffer from
> E820_RAM, and marks it from E820_RAM to E820_RESERVED).
> This is a potential and rare case we need to deal with in OS in
> the future.
>
> Suggested-by: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
> Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
> Cc: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
> Cc: Lee Chun-Yi <[email protected]>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <[email protected]>
> ---
> +static int get_e820_md5(struct e820map *map, void *buf)
> +{
> + struct scatterlist sg;
> + struct crypto_ahash *tfm;
> + struct ahash_request *req;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + tfm = crypto_alloc_ahash("md5", 0, CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC);
> + if (IS_ERR(tfm))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + req = ahash_request_alloc(tfm, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!req) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto free_ahash;
> + }
I looked elsewhere in kernel, and there is this idiom for placing
struct ahash_request on stack. Instead of the ahash_request_alloc()
and never-actually-tirggering-error handling, you can do:
{
AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK(req, tfm);
> +
> + sg_init_one(&sg, (u8 *)map, sizeof(struct e820map));
> + ahash_request_set_callback(req, 0, NULL, NULL);
> + ahash_request_set_crypt(req, &sg, buf, sizeof(struct e820map));
> +
> + if (crypto_ahash_digest(req))
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> + ahash_request_free(req);
> + free_ahash:
and, naturally, the free() and the label would not be needed too,
just close the one extra brace:
> + crypto_free_ahash(tfm);
> +
> + return ret;
}
> +}
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 03:10:18PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Chen Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On some platforms, there is occasional panic triggered when trying to
> > resume from hibernation, a typical panic looks like:
> >
> > "BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffff880085894000
> > IP: [<ffffffff810c5dc2>] load_image_lzo+0x8c2/0xe70"
> >
> > Investigation carried out by Lee Chun-Yi show that this is because
> > e820 map has been changed by BIOS across hibernation, and one
> > of the page frames from suspend kernel is right located in restore
> > kernel's unmapped region, so panic comes out when accessing unmapped
> > kernel address.
> >
> > In order to expose this issue earlier, the md5 hash of e820 map
> > is passed from suspend kernel to restore kernel, and the restore
> > kernel will terminate the resume process once it finds the md5
> > hash are not the same.
> >
> > As the format of image header has been modified, the magic number
> > should also be adjusted as kernels with the same RESTORE_MAGIC have
> > to use the same header format and interpret all of the fields in
> > it in the same way.
> >
> > If the suspend kernel is built without md5 support, and the restore
> > kernel has md5 support, then the latter will bypass the check process.
> > Vice versa the restore kernel will bypass the check if it does not
> > support md5 operation.
> >
> > Note:
> > 1. Without this patch applied, it is possible that BIOS has
> > provided an inconsistent memory map, but the resume kernel is still
> > able to restore the image anyway(e.g, E820_RAM region is the superset
> > of the previous one), although the system might be unstable. So this
> > patch tries to treat any inconsistent e820 as illegal.
> >
> > 2. Another case is, this patch replies on comparing the e820_saved, but
> > currently the e820_save might not be strictly the same across
> > hibernation, even if BIOS has provided consistent e820 map - In
> > theory mptable might modify the BIOS-provided e820_saved dynamically
> > in early_reserve_e820_mpc_new, which would allocate a buffer from
> > E820_RAM, and marks it from E820_RAM to E820_RESERVED).
> > This is a potential and rare case we need to deal with in OS in
> > the future.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
> > Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Lee Chun-Yi <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <[email protected]>
> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <[email protected]>
> > ---
>
> > +static int get_e820_md5(struct e820map *map, void *buf)
> > +{
> > + struct scatterlist sg;
> > + struct crypto_ahash *tfm;
> > + struct ahash_request *req;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + tfm = crypto_alloc_ahash("md5", 0, CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC);
> > + if (IS_ERR(tfm))
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + req = ahash_request_alloc(tfm, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!req) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto free_ahash;
> > + }
>
> I looked elsewhere in kernel, and there is this idiom for placing
> struct ahash_request on stack. Instead of the ahash_request_alloc()
> and never-actually-tirggering-error handling, you can do:
>
> {
> AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK(req, tfm);
>
> > +
> > + sg_init_one(&sg, (u8 *)map, sizeof(struct e820map));
> > + ahash_request_set_callback(req, 0, NULL, NULL);
> > + ahash_request_set_crypt(req, &sg, buf, sizeof(struct e820map));
> > +
> > + if (crypto_ahash_digest(req))
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + ahash_request_free(req);
> > + free_ahash:
>
> and, naturally, the free() and the label would not be needed too,
> just close the one extra brace:
>
> > + crypto_free_ahash(tfm);
> > +
> > + return ret;
>
> }
>
> > +}
OK, thanks for point it out, will do in next version.
Yu