| Message ID | 20250212081505.2025320-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Refine kmalloc caches randomization in kvmalloc | expand |
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 04:15:03PM +0800, GONG Ruiqi wrote: > Hi, > > v3: > - move all the way from kmalloc_gfp_adjust to kvrealloc_noprof into > mm/slub.c > - some rewording for commit logs > v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250208014723.1514049-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ > - change the implementation as Vlastimil suggested > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250122074817.991060-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ > > Tamás reported [1] that kmalloc cache randomization doesn't actually > work for those kmalloc invoked via kvmalloc. For more details, see the > commit log of patch 2. > > The current solution requires a direct call from __kvmalloc_node_noprof > to __do_kmalloc_node, a static function in a different .c file. As > suggested by Vlastimil [2], it's achieved by simply moving > __kvmalloc_node_noprof from mm/util.c to mm/slub.c, together with some > other functions of the same family. Hi, GONG! Sorry for my late review. This patch series looks good to me (with a nit), Reviewed-by: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> Also, I verified that the problem you described exists on slab/for-next, and the patch series fixes the problem. Please feel free to add, Tested-by: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> nit: Does it make sense to call __kvmalloc_node_track_caller_noprof() instead of __do_kmalloc_node() to avoid bloating the code size? My simple build test says it saves 1592 bytes: $ ./scripts/bloat-o-meter slub.o.before slub.o.after add/remove: 0/1 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 0/-1592 (-1592) Function old new delta __kvmalloc_node_noprof.cold 39 - -39 __kvmalloc_node_noprof 1755 202 -1553 Total: Before=79723, After=78131, chg -2.00% > Link: https://github.com/google/security-research/blob/908d59b573960dc0b90adda6f16f7017aca08609/pocs/linux/kernelctf/CVE-2024-27397_mitigation/docs/exploit.md?plain=1#L259 [1] > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/62044279-0c56-4185-97f7-7afac65ff449@suse.cz/ [2]
On 2/12/25 15:20, Harry Yoo wrote: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 04:15:03PM +0800, GONG Ruiqi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> v3: >> - move all the way from kmalloc_gfp_adjust to kvrealloc_noprof into >> mm/slub.c >> - some rewording for commit logs >> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250208014723.1514049-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ >> - change the implementation as Vlastimil suggested >> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250122074817.991060-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ >> >> Tamás reported [1] that kmalloc cache randomization doesn't actually >> work for those kmalloc invoked via kvmalloc. For more details, see the >> commit log of patch 2. >> >> The current solution requires a direct call from __kvmalloc_node_noprof >> to __do_kmalloc_node, a static function in a different .c file. As >> suggested by Vlastimil [2], it's achieved by simply moving >> __kvmalloc_node_noprof from mm/util.c to mm/slub.c, together with some >> other functions of the same family. > > Hi, GONG! > Sorry for my late review. > > This patch series looks good to me (with a nit), > Reviewed-by: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> > > Also, I verified that the problem you described exists on slab/for-next, > and the patch series fixes the problem. Please feel free to add, > Tested-by: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> Thanks! > nit: Does it make sense to call __kvmalloc_node_track_caller_noprof() > instead of __do_kmalloc_node() to avoid bloating the code size? Hm I think it would be a bit arbitrary to make kvmalloc special like this here. But we should probably change __do_kmalloc_node() to __fastpath_inline. Or even check if not making it inline at all results in other callers (not kvmalloc probably due to its complexity) doing a tail call there, which should be fast enough. > My simple build test says it saves 1592 bytes: > $ ./scripts/bloat-o-meter slub.o.before slub.o.after > add/remove: 0/1 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 0/-1592 (-1592) > Function old new delta > __kvmalloc_node_noprof.cold 39 - -39 > __kvmalloc_node_noprof 1755 202 -1553 > Total: Before=79723, After=78131, chg -2.00% > >> Link: https://github.com/google/security-research/blob/908d59b573960dc0b90adda6f16f7017aca08609/pocs/linux/kernelctf/CVE-2024-27397_mitigation/docs/exploit.md?plain=1#L259 [1] >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/62044279-0c56-4185-97f7-7afac65ff449@suse.cz/ [2] >
On 2/12/25 09:15, GONG Ruiqi wrote: > Hi, > > v3: > - move all the way from kmalloc_gfp_adjust to kvrealloc_noprof into > mm/slub.c > - some rewording for commit logs > v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250208014723.1514049-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ > - change the implementation as Vlastimil suggested > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250122074817.991060-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ > > Tamás reported [1] that kmalloc cache randomization doesn't actually > work for those kmalloc invoked via kvmalloc. For more details, see the > commit log of patch 2. > > The current solution requires a direct call from __kvmalloc_node_noprof > to __do_kmalloc_node, a static function in a different .c file. As > suggested by Vlastimil [2], it's achieved by simply moving > __kvmalloc_node_noprof from mm/util.c to mm/slub.c, together with some > other functions of the same family. > > Link: https://github.com/google/security-research/blob/908d59b573960dc0b90adda6f16f7017aca08609/pocs/linux/kernelctf/CVE-2024-27397_mitigation/docs/exploit.md?plain=1#L259 [1] > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/62044279-0c56-4185-97f7-7afac65ff449@suse.cz/ [2] > > GONG Ruiqi (2): > slab: Adjust placement of __kvmalloc_node_noprof > slab: Achieve better kmalloc caches randomization in kvmalloc Applied to slab/for-next, thanks! > > mm/slub.c | 162 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > mm/util.c | 162 ------------------------------------------------------ > 2 files changed, 162 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-) >
Hi, v3: - move all the way from kmalloc_gfp_adjust to kvrealloc_noprof into mm/slub.c - some rewording for commit logs v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250208014723.1514049-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ - change the implementation as Vlastimil suggested v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250122074817.991060-1-gongruiqi1@huawei.com/ Tamás reported [1] that kmalloc cache randomization doesn't actually work for those kmalloc invoked via kvmalloc. For more details, see the commit log of patch 2. The current solution requires a direct call from __kvmalloc_node_noprof to __do_kmalloc_node, a static function in a different .c file. As suggested by Vlastimil [2], it's achieved by simply moving __kvmalloc_node_noprof from mm/util.c to mm/slub.c, together with some other functions of the same family. Link: https://github.com/google/security-research/blob/908d59b573960dc0b90adda6f16f7017aca08609/pocs/linux/kernelctf/CVE-2024-27397_mitigation/docs/exploit.md?plain=1#L259 [1] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/62044279-0c56-4185-97f7-7afac65ff449@suse.cz/ [2] GONG Ruiqi (2): slab: Adjust placement of __kvmalloc_node_noprof slab: Achieve better kmalloc caches randomization in kvmalloc mm/slub.c | 162 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ mm/util.c | 162 ------------------------------------------------------ 2 files changed, 162 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-)