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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kasan: add memory corruption identification for
 software tag-based mode
To:     Walter Wu <walter-zh.wu@mediatek.com>
Cc:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
        "Jason A . Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
        Miles Chen <miles.chen@mediatek.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
        wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>
References: <20190613081357.1360-1-walter-zh.wu@mediatek.com>
 <da7591c9-660d-d380-d59e-6d70b39eaa6b@virtuozzo.com>
 <1560447999.15814.15.camel@mtksdccf07> <1560479520.15814.34.camel@mtksdccf07>
 <1560744017.15814.49.camel@mtksdccf07>
 <CACT4Y+Y3uS59rXf92ByQuFK_G4v0H8NNnCY1tCbr4V+PaZF3ag@mail.gmail.com>
 <1560774735.15814.54.camel@mtksdccf07> <1561974995.18866.1.camel@mtksdccf07>
 <CACT4Y+aMXTBE0uVkeZz+MuPx3X1nESSBncgkScWvAkciAxP1RA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ebc99ee1-716b-0b18-66ab-4e93de02ce50@virtuozzo.com>
 <1562640832.9077.32.camel@mtksdccf07>
 <d9fd1d5b-9516-b9b9-0670-a1885e79f278@virtuozzo.com>
 <1562839579.5846.12.camel@mtksdccf07>
 <37897fb7-88c1-859a-dfcc-0a5e89a642e0@virtuozzo.com>
 <1563160001.4793.4.camel@mtksdccf07>
 <9ab1871a-2605-ab34-3fd3-4b44a0e17ab7@virtuozzo.com>
 <1563789162.31223.3.camel@mtksdccf07>
From:   Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
Message-ID: <e62da62a-2a63-3a1c-faeb-9c5561a5170c@virtuozzo.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Jul 2019 15:00:00 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1563789162.31223.3.camel@mtksdccf07>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 7/22/19 12:52 PM, Walter Wu wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 19:11 +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>
>> On 7/15/19 6:06 AM, Walter Wu wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2019-07-12 at 13:52 +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 7/11/19 1:06 PM, Walter Wu wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 21:24 +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/9/19 5:53 AM, Walter Wu wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 2019-07-08 at 19:33 +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/5/19 4:34 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 11:56 AM Walter Wu <walter-zh.wu@mediatek.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sorry for delays. I am overwhelm by some urgent work. I afraid to
>>>>>>>>> promise any dates because the next week I am on a conference, then
>>>>>>>>> again a backlog and an intern starting...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andrey, do you still have concerns re this patch? This change allows
>>>>>>>>> to print the free stack.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I 'm not sure that quarantine is a best way to do that. Quarantine is made to delay freeing, but we don't that here.
>>>>>>>> If we want to remember more free stacks wouldn't be easier simply to remember more stacks in object itself?
>>>>>>>> Same for previously used tags for better use-after-free identification.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Andrey,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We ever tried to use object itself to determine use-after-free
>>>>>>> identification, but tag-based KASAN immediately released the pointer
>>>>>>> after call kfree(), the original object will be used by another
>>>>>>> pointer, if we use object itself to determine use-after-free issue, then
>>>>>>> it has many false negative cases. so we create a lite quarantine(ring
>>>>>>> buffers) to record recent free stacks in order to avoid those false
>>>>>>> negative situations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm telling that *more* than one free stack and also tags per object can be stored.
>>>>>> If object reused we would still have information about n-last usages of the object.
>>>>>> It seems like much easier and more efficient solution than patch you proposing.
>>>>>>
>>>>> To make the object reused, we must ensure that no other pointers uses it
>>>>> after kfree() release the pointer.
>>>>> Scenario:
>>>>> 1). The object reused information is valid when no another pointer uses
>>>>> it.
>>>>> 2). The object reused information is invalid when another pointer uses
>>>>> it.
>>>>> Do you mean that the object reused is scenario 1) ?
>>>>> If yes, maybe we can change the calling quarantine_put() location. It
>>>>> will be fully use that quarantine, but at scenario 2) it looks like to
>>>>> need this patch.
>>>>> If no, maybe i miss your meaning, would you tell me how to use invalid
>>>>> object information? or?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> KASAN keeps information about object with the object, right after payload in the kasan_alloc_meta struct.
>>>> This information is always valid as long as slab page allocated. Currently it keeps only one last free stacktrace.
>>>> It could be extended to record more free stacktraces and also record previously used tags which will allow you
>>>> to identify use-after-free and extract right free stacktrace.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your explanation.
>>>
>>> For extend slub object, if one record is 9B (sizeof(u8)+ sizeof(struct
>>> kasan_track)) and add five records into slub object, every slub object
>>> may add 45B usage after the system runs longer. 
>>> Slub object number is easy more than 1,000,000(maybe it may be more
>>> bigger), then the extending object memory usage should be 45MB, and
>>> unfortunately it is no limit. The memory usage is more bigger than our
>>> patch.
>>
>> No, it's not necessarily more.
>> And there are other aspects to consider such as performance, how simple reliable the code is.
>>
>>>
>>> We hope tag-based KASAN advantage is smaller memory usage. If it’s
>>> possible, we should spend less memory in order to identify
>>> use-after-free. Would you accept our patch after fine tune it?
>>
>> Sure, if you manage to fix issues and demonstrate that performance penalty of your
>> patch is close to zero.
> 
> 
> I remember that there are already the lists which you concern. Maybe we
> can try to solve those problems one by one.
> 
> 1. deadlock issue? cause by kmalloc() after kfree()?

smp_call_on_cpu()

> 2. decrease allocation fail, to modify GFP_NOWAIT flag to GFP_KERNEL?

No, this is not gonna work. Ideally we shouldn't have any allocations there.
It's not reliable and it hurts performance.


> 3. check whether slim 48 bytes (sizeof (qlist_object) +
> sizeof(kasan_alloc_meta)) and additional unique stacktrace in
> stackdepot?
> 4. duplicate struct 'kasan_track' information in two different places
> 

Yup.

> Would you have any other concern? or?
> 

It would be nice to see some performance numbers. Something that uses slab allocations a lot, e.g. netperf STREAM_STREAM test.