Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp47009imu; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 13:46:52 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7fUnotDisfTVL+BCMQKj9py12WyPwBRD0jnFp3w7lCinGYAQ0oPbAumBfvyAscB/Mv3ABl X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b494:: with SMTP id y20mr49522716plr.178.1546552012760; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 13:46:52 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1546552012; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=l6C6XkP+6DETA157AZZd0xoUpT5hx/uKYWwX3mavAjQooPPHTk53GV057jFDpGV0me ORR23vMw5Mnu6+n4SuOlH8bhDHrZ3bntwwubwNqrb2LrOwe3+i1n4rrCe9o7Y5kGpGxW bRbhrbUeLLTfnUYizfRr8ptwW1KypUbIoSPxfzlNZs0Yi4AWwFkxZH1AW7slGN8ebuvO PFoyWjTVX3ctkipO/ID7Qk1pVa2q6L0lLqfaFeaXS0Qn6cJGrfyNq/qLq9RDSYm6F1YZ jg+kEXbE9Esj441ED142Phc5ucCCHrhEFih840r7IECKFhy0MRKvy5/J4B0iAu5KIE3D k2TA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=93ILhehKpAiROOUYalmGtOI+SGZCEoQDJM6I2HnRgz4=; b=ZXwi/zVtLhFeW6jrFpWrNLhNYKLfDtNjH5ZQx4/QlX8S0pefCF0RWFsC/4MLE3NVIz ZlD3FP3ARFzFXVqEuwIvZE2MN+2coT0GMCMGzs4pLJgcMkGknk4hegl7Z+H8kw8zDCgG /j+DFRlwUUMWpZnTVUme0kIAIAgnxowY3hf8wu9kiwY27YvHJprknUSykCuYEkbj7TT6 k4pcWfyjD0beoLeCVlhtnHUeJ+leopiNqUpdj1oZQYQc/xzdckhBaRoQTpOtnsMBPmpa Twa+LxrsyRzzgR0Ed6qMia72S4Q3A2bZcPQs9yyb5aOuY2ZxB4x15QQaHXyGwA6slPM2 sqFA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y15si52430297pgf.321.2019.01.03.13.46.37; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 13:46:52 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730856AbfACPN7 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:13:59 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:35000 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728208AbfACPN7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:13:59 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4F8AAD47; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 15:13:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 16:13:57 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Roman Penyaev Cc: Andrew Morton , Andrey Ryabinin , Joe Perches , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/vmalloc: fix size check for remap_vmalloc_range_partial() Message-ID: <20190103151357.GR31793@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190103145954.16942-1-rpenyaev@suse.de> <20190103145954.16942-2-rpenyaev@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190103145954.16942-2-rpenyaev@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 03-01-19 15:59:52, Roman Penyaev wrote: > area->size can include adjacent guard page but get_vm_area_size() > returns actual size of the area. > > This fixes possible kernel crash when userspace tries to map area > on 1 page bigger: size check passes but the following vmalloc_to_page() > returns NULL on last guard (non-existing) page. Can this actually happen? I am not really familiar with all the callers of this API but VM_NO_GUARD is not really used wildly in the kernel. All I can see is kasan na arm64 which doesn't really seem to use it for vmalloc. So is the problem real or this is a mere cleanup? > Signed-off-by: Roman Penyaev > Cc: Andrew Morton > Cc: Michal Hocko > Cc: Andrey Ryabinin > Cc: Joe Perches > Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > --- > mm/vmalloc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c > index 871e41c55e23..2cd24186ba84 100644 > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c > @@ -2248,7 +2248,7 @@ int remap_vmalloc_range_partial(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long uaddr, > if (!(area->flags & VM_USERMAP)) > return -EINVAL; > > - if (kaddr + size > area->addr + area->size) > + if (kaddr + size > area->addr + get_vm_area_size(area)) > return -EINVAL; > > do { > -- > 2.19.1 -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs