Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 09:34:59 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Larry Woodman <lwoodman@redhat.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
        Helge Diller <deller@gmx.de>, James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
        "security@kernel.org" <security@kernel.org>,
        linux-distros@vs.openwall.org,
        Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@qualys.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ximin Luo <infinity0@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: larger stack guard gap, between vmas
Message-ID: <20170706073457.GA32022@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <1499126133.2707.20.camel@decadent.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFzMX72+Kb=zNgjCf6UfPt+C+e7WDp_rpbSLuOVx1k7iqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170704084122.GC14722@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20170704093538.GF14722@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20170704094728.GB22013@1wt.eu>
 <20170704104211.GG14722@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20170704113611.GA4732@decadent.org.uk>
 <1499209315.2707.29.camel@decadent.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFzjibuaV=GBZQN8KOaCpf1P3B1abJCYGaxEM9RVpf9fXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170705063645.GA10354@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170705063645.GA10354@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1427
Lines: 36

On Wed 05-07-17 08:36:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 04-07-17 16:31:52, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > We have:
> > >
> > > bottom = 0xff803fff
> > > sp =     0xffffb178
> > >
> > > The relevant mappings are:
> > >
> > > ff7fc000-ff7fd000 rwxp 00000000 00:00 0
> > > fffdd000-ffffe000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0                                  [stack]
> > 
> > Ugh. So that stack is actually 8MB in size, but the alloca() is about
> > to use up almost all of it, and there's only about 28kB left between
> > "bottom" and that 'rwx' mapping.
> > 
> > Still, that rwx mapping is interesting: it is a single page, and it
> > really is almost exactly 8MB below the stack.
> > 
> > In fact, the top of stack (at 0xffffe000) is *exactly* 8MB+4kB from
> > the top of that odd one-page allocation (0xff7fd000).
> 
> Very interesting! I would be really curious whether changing ulimit to
> something bigger changes the picture.

It's public holiday today here and I haven't read all new emails and I
will be mostly offline today. I will catch up tomorrow. But before we go
to more tricky workarounds. Could you double check that simply
increasing the RLIMIT_STACK workarounds the problem here? Because if it
does and other workarounds require some manual intervention then
changing ulimit sounds like the least tricky one to me.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs