This bug is awaiting verification that the linux-azure/5.15.0-1040.47
kernel in -proposed solves the problem. Please test the kernel and
update this bug with the results. If the problem is solved, change the
tag 'verification-needed-jammy' to 'verification-done-jammy'. If the
problem still exists, change the tag 'verification-needed-jammy' to
'verification-failed-jammy'.

If verification is not done by 5 working days from today, this fix will
be dropped from the source code, and this bug will be closed.

See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how
to enable and use -proposed. Thank you!


** Tags added: kernel-spammed-jammy-linux-azure

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2013088

Title:
  kernel: fix __clear_user() inline assembly constraints

Status in Ubuntu on IBM z Systems:
  Fix Released
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in linux source package in Bionic:
  Fix Released
Status in linux source package in Focal:
  Fix Released
Status in linux source package in Jammy:
  Fix Released
Status in linux source package in Kinetic:
  Fix Released
Status in linux source package in Lunar:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  SRU Justification:
  ==================

  [ Impact ]

   * In case clear_user() crosses two pages and faults on the second page
     the kernel may write lowcore contents to the first page, instead of
     clearing it.

   * The __clear_user() inline assembly misses earlyclobber constraint
     modifiers. Depending on compiler and compiler options this may lead to
     incorrect code which copies kernel lowcore contents to user space 
     instead of clearing memory, in case clear_user() faults.

  [Fix]

   * For Kinetic and Jammy cherrypick of
     89aba4c26fae 89aba4c26fae4e459f755a18912845c348ee48f3
     "s390/uaccess: add missing earlyclobber annotations to __clear_user()"

   * For Focal and Bionic a backport of the above commit is needed:
     https://launchpadlibrarian.net/659551648/s390-uaccess.patch

  [ Test Plan ]

   * A test program in C is needed and used for testing.

   * The test will be done by IBM.

  [ Where problems could occur ]

   * The modification is limited to function 'long __clear_user'.

   * And there, just to one inline assembly constraints line.

   * This is usually difficult to trace.

   * A erroneous modification may lead to a wrong behavior in
     'long __clear_user',

   * and maybe returning a wrong size (in uaccess.c).

  [ Other Info ]

   * This affects all Ubuntu releases in service, down to 18.04.

   * Since we are close to 23.04 kernel freeze, I submit a patch request for
     23.04 separately, and submit the SRU request for the all other
     Ubuntu releases later.

  __________

  Description:   kernel: fix __clear_user() inline assembly constraints

  Symptom:       In case clear_user() crosses two pages and faults on the
                 second page the kernel may write lowcore contents to the
                 first page, instead of clearing it.

  Problem:       The __clear_user() inline assembly misses earlyclobber
                 constraint modifiers. Depending on compiler and compiler
                 options this may lead to incorrect code which copies kernel
                 lowcore contents to user space instead of clearing memory,
                 in case clear_user() faults.

  Solution:      Add missing earlyclobber constraint modifiers.
  Preventive:    yes

  Upstream-ID:   89aba4c26fae4e459f755a18912845c348ee48f3

  Affected Releases:
                 18.04
                 20.04
                 22.04
                 22.10
                 23.04

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-z-systems/+bug/2013088/+subscriptions


-- 
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
Post to     : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to