On Tue 13-02-18 16:03:09, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 13/02/2018 15:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 08-02-18 13:35:08, David Rientjes wrote:
> >> The KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING ioctl does a vmalloc() of
> >> sizeof(struct kvm_irq_routing_entry) multiplied by a user-supplied value.
> >> This can be up to 4096 entries on architectures such as arm64 and s390
> >> (and the upper bound may be increased on s390 eventually).
> >> This can produce a vmalloc allocation failure warning:
> >> vmalloc: allocation failure: 0 bytes,
> >> mode:0x24000c2(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_HIGHMEM)
> > I am not arguing about the kvm change but do we actaully want to warn
> > for 0 sized allocations? This just doesn't make much sense to me.
> > In other words don't we want this?
> > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > index 673942094328..c5d832510c54 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > @@ -1748,7 +1748,9 @@ void *__vmalloc_node_range(unsigned long size,
> > unsigned long align,
> > unsigned long real_size = size;
> > size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> > - if (!size || (size >> PAGE_SHIFT) > totalram_pages)
> > + if (!size)
> > + return NULL;
> > + if ((size >> PAGE_SHIFT) > totalram_pages)
> > goto fail;
> > area = __get_vm_area_node(size, align, VM_ALLOC | VM_UNINITIALIZED |
> There have been quite a few reports of this from syzkaller and generally
> we've fixed them. It does seem like a recipe for NULL-pointer
> dereferences when the size is user-controlled (as in this case).
We do return NULL for that case regardless the above. The patch just
doesn't warn. Or do you think it is helpful to warn?