Message ID | 20231206150729.54604-1-marpagan@redhat.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [v3] kunit: run test suites only after module initialization completes | expand |
On 06/12/2023 15:07, Marco Pagani wrote: > Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in > kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed a wild-memory-access bug that could have > happened during the loading phase of test suites built and executed as > loadable modules. However, it also introduced a problematic side effect > that causes test suites modules to crash when they attempt to register > fake devices. > > When a module is loaded, it traverses the MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED and > MODULE_STATE_COMING states before reaching the normal operating state > MODULE_STATE_LIVE. Finally, when the module is removed, it moves to > MODULE_STATE_GOING before being released. However, if the loading > function load_module() fails between complete_formation() and > do_init_module(), the module goes directly from MODULE_STATE_COMING to > MODULE_STATE_GOING without passing through MODULE_STATE_LIVE. > > This behavior was causing kunit_module_exit() to be called without > having first executed kunit_module_init(). Since kunit_module_exit() is > responsible for freeing the memory allocated by kunit_module_init() > through kunit_filter_suites(), this behavior was resulting in a > wild-memory-access bug. > > Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in > kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed this issue by running the tests when the > module is still in MODULE_STATE_COMING. However, modules in that state > are not fully initialized, lacking sysfs kobjects. Therefore, if a test > module attempts to register a fake device, it will inevitably crash. > > This patch proposes a different approach to fix the original > wild-memory-access bug while restoring the normal module execution flow > by making kunit_module_exit() able to detect if kunit_module_init() has > previously initialized the tests suite set. In this way, test modules > can once again register fake devices without crashing. > > This behavior is achieved by checking whether mod->kunit_suites is a > virtual or direct mapping address. If it is a virtual address, then > kunit_module_init() has allocated the suite_set in kunit_filter_suites() > using kmalloc_array(). On the contrary, if mod->kunit_suites is still > pointing to the original address that was set when looking up the > .kunit_test_suites section of the module, then the loading phase has > failed and there's no memory to be freed. > > v3: > - add a comment to clarify why the start address is checked > v2: > - add include <linux/mm.h> > > Fixes: 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in kunit_free_suite_set()") > Tested-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> > Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Marco Pagani <marpagan@redhat.com> > --- For V3: Tested-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> Fixes this crash: https://lore.kernel.org/all/e239b94b-462a-41e5-9a4c-cd1ffd530d75@opensource.cirrus.com/ Also tested with sound/pci/hda/cirrus_scodec_test.c
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 10:07 AM Marco Pagani <marpagan@redhat.com> wrote: > > Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in > kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed a wild-memory-access bug that could have > happened during the loading phase of test suites built and executed as > loadable modules. However, it also introduced a problematic side effect > that causes test suites modules to crash when they attempt to register > fake devices. > > When a module is loaded, it traverses the MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED and > MODULE_STATE_COMING states before reaching the normal operating state > MODULE_STATE_LIVE. Finally, when the module is removed, it moves to > MODULE_STATE_GOING before being released. However, if the loading > function load_module() fails between complete_formation() and > do_init_module(), the module goes directly from MODULE_STATE_COMING to > MODULE_STATE_GOING without passing through MODULE_STATE_LIVE. > > This behavior was causing kunit_module_exit() to be called without > having first executed kunit_module_init(). Since kunit_module_exit() is > responsible for freeing the memory allocated by kunit_module_init() > through kunit_filter_suites(), this behavior was resulting in a > wild-memory-access bug. > > Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in > kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed this issue by running the tests when the > module is still in MODULE_STATE_COMING. However, modules in that state > are not fully initialized, lacking sysfs kobjects. Therefore, if a test > module attempts to register a fake device, it will inevitably crash. > > This patch proposes a different approach to fix the original > wild-memory-access bug while restoring the normal module execution flow > by making kunit_module_exit() able to detect if kunit_module_init() has > previously initialized the tests suite set. In this way, test modules > can once again register fake devices without crashing. > > This behavior is achieved by checking whether mod->kunit_suites is a > virtual or direct mapping address. If it is a virtual address, then > kunit_module_init() has allocated the suite_set in kunit_filter_suites() > using kmalloc_array(). On the contrary, if mod->kunit_suites is still > pointing to the original address that was set when looking up the > .kunit_test_suites section of the module, then the loading phase has > failed and there's no memory to be freed. > Hello, I have tested this change and it looks good to me! Although, it no longer applies cleanly on the kselftest/kunit branch so it will need to be rebased. So besides the need for a rebase, Tested-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com> Thanks for the fix! Rae > v3: > - add a comment to clarify why the start address is checked > v2: > - add include <linux/mm.h> > > Fixes: 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in kunit_free_suite_set()") > Tested-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> > Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Marco Pagani <marpagan@redhat.com> > --- > lib/kunit/test.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c > index 7aceb07a1af9..3263e0d5e0f6 100644 > --- a/lib/kunit/test.c > +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c > @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ > #include <linux/panic.h> > #include <linux/sched/debug.h> > #include <linux/sched.h> > +#include <linux/mm.h> > > #include "debugfs.h" > #include "hooks-impl.h" > @@ -775,12 +776,19 @@ static void kunit_module_exit(struct module *mod) > }; > const char *action = kunit_action(); > > + /* > + * Check if the start address is a valid virtual address to detect > + * if the module load sequence has failed and the suite set has not > + * been initialized and filtered. > + */ > + if (!suite_set.start || !virt_addr_valid(suite_set.start)) > + return; > + > if (!action) > __kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites, > mod->num_kunit_suites); > > - if (suite_set.start) > - kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); > + kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); > } > > static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > @@ -790,12 +798,12 @@ static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > > switch (val) { > case MODULE_STATE_LIVE: > + kunit_module_init(mod); > break; > case MODULE_STATE_GOING: > kunit_module_exit(mod); > break; > case MODULE_STATE_COMING: > - kunit_module_init(mod); > break; > case MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED: > break; > > base-commit: 33cc938e65a98f1d29d0a18403dbbee050dcad9a > -- > 2.43.0 >
On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 23:07, Marco Pagani <marpagan@redhat.com> wrote: > > Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in > kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed a wild-memory-access bug that could have > happened during the loading phase of test suites built and executed as > loadable modules. However, it also introduced a problematic side effect > that causes test suites modules to crash when they attempt to register > fake devices. > > When a module is loaded, it traverses the MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED and > MODULE_STATE_COMING states before reaching the normal operating state > MODULE_STATE_LIVE. Finally, when the module is removed, it moves to > MODULE_STATE_GOING before being released. However, if the loading > function load_module() fails between complete_formation() and > do_init_module(), the module goes directly from MODULE_STATE_COMING to > MODULE_STATE_GOING without passing through MODULE_STATE_LIVE. > > This behavior was causing kunit_module_exit() to be called without > having first executed kunit_module_init(). Since kunit_module_exit() is > responsible for freeing the memory allocated by kunit_module_init() > through kunit_filter_suites(), this behavior was resulting in a > wild-memory-access bug. > > Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in > kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed this issue by running the tests when the > module is still in MODULE_STATE_COMING. However, modules in that state > are not fully initialized, lacking sysfs kobjects. Therefore, if a test > module attempts to register a fake device, it will inevitably crash. > > This patch proposes a different approach to fix the original > wild-memory-access bug while restoring the normal module execution flow > by making kunit_module_exit() able to detect if kunit_module_init() has > previously initialized the tests suite set. In this way, test modules > can once again register fake devices without crashing. > > This behavior is achieved by checking whether mod->kunit_suites is a > virtual or direct mapping address. If it is a virtual address, then > kunit_module_init() has allocated the suite_set in kunit_filter_suites() > using kmalloc_array(). On the contrary, if mod->kunit_suites is still > pointing to the original address that was set when looking up the > .kunit_test_suites section of the module, then the loading phase has > failed and there's no memory to be freed. > > v3: > - add a comment to clarify why the start address is checked > v2: > - add include <linux/mm.h> > > Fixes: 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in kunit_free_suite_set()") > Tested-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> > Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Marco Pagani <marpagan@redhat.com> > --- Sorry for the delay here: there are enough subtleties here that I wanted to double check some things. I keep feeling that there has to be a nicer way of doing this, but I can't think of one, so let's go with this, since it's fixing a real issue. I'm a little hesitant about our use of the suite_set.start address as an 'is initialised' flag, and depending on it being reallocated via kunit_filter_suites(), but since we already depend on that (by always using kunit_free_suite_set()), I'm okay with it. My only request (other than this needing a rebase, probably on top of 6.8) would be to add a comment in kunit_filter_suites() noting that it must return a virtual address. That's probably something we should've done a while ago, but I can just see this requirement getting forgotten. Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Cheers, -- David > lib/kunit/test.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c > index 7aceb07a1af9..3263e0d5e0f6 100644 > --- a/lib/kunit/test.c > +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c > @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ > #include <linux/panic.h> > #include <linux/sched/debug.h> > #include <linux/sched.h> > +#include <linux/mm.h> > > #include "debugfs.h" > #include "hooks-impl.h" > @@ -775,12 +776,19 @@ static void kunit_module_exit(struct module *mod) > }; > const char *action = kunit_action(); > > + /* > + * Check if the start address is a valid virtual address to detect > + * if the module load sequence has failed and the suite set has not > + * been initialized and filtered. > + */ > + if (!suite_set.start || !virt_addr_valid(suite_set.start)) > + return; > + > if (!action) > __kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites, > mod->num_kunit_suites); > > - if (suite_set.start) > - kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); > + kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); > } > > static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > @@ -790,12 +798,12 @@ static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > > switch (val) { > case MODULE_STATE_LIVE: > + kunit_module_init(mod); > break; > case MODULE_STATE_GOING: > kunit_module_exit(mod); > break; > case MODULE_STATE_COMING: > - kunit_module_init(mod); > break; > case MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED: > break; > > base-commit: 33cc938e65a98f1d29d0a18403dbbee050dcad9a > -- > 2.43.0 >
On 2024-01-08 08:27, David Gow wrote: > On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 23:07, Marco Pagani <marpagan@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in >> kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed a wild-memory-access bug that could have >> happened during the loading phase of test suites built and executed as >> loadable modules. However, it also introduced a problematic side effect >> that causes test suites modules to crash when they attempt to register >> fake devices. >> >> When a module is loaded, it traverses the MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED and >> MODULE_STATE_COMING states before reaching the normal operating state >> MODULE_STATE_LIVE. Finally, when the module is removed, it moves to >> MODULE_STATE_GOING before being released. However, if the loading >> function load_module() fails between complete_formation() and >> do_init_module(), the module goes directly from MODULE_STATE_COMING to >> MODULE_STATE_GOING without passing through MODULE_STATE_LIVE. >> >> This behavior was causing kunit_module_exit() to be called without >> having first executed kunit_module_init(). Since kunit_module_exit() is >> responsible for freeing the memory allocated by kunit_module_init() >> through kunit_filter_suites(), this behavior was resulting in a >> wild-memory-access bug. >> >> Commit 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in >> kunit_free_suite_set()") fixed this issue by running the tests when the >> module is still in MODULE_STATE_COMING. However, modules in that state >> are not fully initialized, lacking sysfs kobjects. Therefore, if a test >> module attempts to register a fake device, it will inevitably crash. >> >> This patch proposes a different approach to fix the original >> wild-memory-access bug while restoring the normal module execution flow >> by making kunit_module_exit() able to detect if kunit_module_init() has >> previously initialized the tests suite set. In this way, test modules >> can once again register fake devices without crashing. >> >> This behavior is achieved by checking whether mod->kunit_suites is a >> virtual or direct mapping address. If it is a virtual address, then >> kunit_module_init() has allocated the suite_set in kunit_filter_suites() >> using kmalloc_array(). On the contrary, if mod->kunit_suites is still >> pointing to the original address that was set when looking up the >> .kunit_test_suites section of the module, then the loading phase has >> failed and there's no memory to be freed. >> >> v3: >> - add a comment to clarify why the start address is checked >> v2: >> - add include <linux/mm.h> >> >> Fixes: 2810c1e99867 ("kunit: Fix wild-memory-access bug in kunit_free_suite_set()") >> Tested-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> >> Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com> >> Signed-off-by: Marco Pagani <marpagan@redhat.com> >> --- > > Sorry for the delay here: there are enough subtleties here that I > wanted to double check some things. > > I keep feeling that there has to be a nicer way of doing this, but I > can't think of one, so let's go with this, since it's fixing a real > issue. > > I'm a little hesitant about our use of the suite_set.start address as > an 'is initialised' flag, and depending on it being reallocated via > kunit_filter_suites(), but since we already depend on that (by always > using kunit_free_suite_set()), I'm okay with it. > I have the same feeling. I spent some thinking about alternative solutions that did not require adding a flag in the module struct or restructuring significant portions of the code, but I could not think of anything better for the moment. > My only request (other than this needing a rebase, probably on top of > 6.8) would be to add a comment in kunit_filter_suites() noting that it > must return a virtual address. That's probably something we should've > done a while ago, but I can just see this requirement getting > forgotten. > Sure, I'll do it. Thanks, Marco > Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> > > >> lib/kunit/test.c | 14 +++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c >> index 7aceb07a1af9..3263e0d5e0f6 100644 >> --- a/lib/kunit/test.c >> +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c >> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ >> #include <linux/panic.h> >> #include <linux/sched/debug.h> >> #include <linux/sched.h> >> +#include <linux/mm.h> >> >> #include "debugfs.h" >> #include "hooks-impl.h" >> @@ -775,12 +776,19 @@ static void kunit_module_exit(struct module *mod) >> }; >> const char *action = kunit_action(); >> >> + /* >> + * Check if the start address is a valid virtual address to detect >> + * if the module load sequence has failed and the suite set has not >> + * been initialized and filtered. >> + */ >> + if (!suite_set.start || !virt_addr_valid(suite_set.start)) >> + return; >> + >> if (!action) >> __kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites, >> mod->num_kunit_suites); >> >> - if (suite_set.start) >> - kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); >> + kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); >> } >> >> static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, >> @@ -790,12 +798,12 @@ static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, >> >> switch (val) { >> case MODULE_STATE_LIVE: >> + kunit_module_init(mod); >> break; >> case MODULE_STATE_GOING: >> kunit_module_exit(mod); >> break; >> case MODULE_STATE_COMING: >> - kunit_module_init(mod); >> break; >> case MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED: >> break; >> >> base-commit: 33cc938e65a98f1d29d0a18403dbbee050dcad9a >> -- >> 2.43.0 >>
diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c index 7aceb07a1af9..3263e0d5e0f6 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ #include <linux/panic.h> #include <linux/sched/debug.h> #include <linux/sched.h> +#include <linux/mm.h> #include "debugfs.h" #include "hooks-impl.h" @@ -775,12 +776,19 @@ static void kunit_module_exit(struct module *mod) }; const char *action = kunit_action(); + /* + * Check if the start address is a valid virtual address to detect + * if the module load sequence has failed and the suite set has not + * been initialized and filtered. + */ + if (!suite_set.start || !virt_addr_valid(suite_set.start)) + return; + if (!action) __kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites, mod->num_kunit_suites); - if (suite_set.start) - kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); + kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); } static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, @@ -790,12 +798,12 @@ static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, switch (val) { case MODULE_STATE_LIVE: + kunit_module_init(mod); break; case MODULE_STATE_GOING: kunit_module_exit(mod); break; case MODULE_STATE_COMING: - kunit_module_init(mod); break; case MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED: break;