Re: perf: fuzzer KASAN slab-out-of-bounds in snb_uncore_imc_event_del

From: Dmitry Vyukov
Date: Tue Nov 15 2016 - 01:14:03 EST


On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 6:57 AM, Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
>> Anyway as per the suggestion at Linux Plumbers I enabled KASAN and on my
>> haswell machine it falls over in a few minutes of running the perf_fuzzer.
>>
>> [ 205.740194] ==================================================================
>> [ 205.748005] BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in snb_uncore_imc_event_del+0x6c/0xa0 at addr ffff8800caa43768
>> [ 205.758324] Read of size 8 by task perf_fuzzer/6618
>> [ 205.763589] CPU: 0 PID: 6618 Comm: perf_fuzzer Not tainted 4.9.0-rc5 #4
>> [ 205.770721] Hardware name: LENOVO 10AM000AUS/SHARKBAY, BIOS FBKT72AUS 01/26/2014
>> [ 205.778689] ffff8800c3c479b8 ffffffff816bb796 ffff88011ec00600 ffff8800caa43580
>> [ 205.786759] ffff8800c3c479e0 ffffffff812fb961 ffff8800c3c47a78 ffff8800caa43580
>> [ 205.794850] ffff8800caa43580 ffff8800c3c47a68 ffffffff812fbbd8 ffff8800c3c47a28
>> [ 205.802911] Call Trace:
>> [ 205.805559] [<ffffffff816bb796>] dump_stack+0x63/0x8d
>> [ 205.811135] [<ffffffff812fb961>] kasan_object_err+0x21/0x70
>> [ 205.817267] [<ffffffff812fbbd8>] kasan_report_error+0x1d8/0x4c0
>> [ 205.823752] [<ffffffff81133275>] ? __lock_is_held+0x75/0xc0
>> [ 205.829868] [<ffffffff81025b12>] ? snb_uncore_imc_read_counter+0x42/0x50
>> [ 205.837198] [<ffffffff810222e2>] ? uncore_perf_event_update+0xe2/0x160
>> [ 205.844337] [<ffffffff812fc319>] kasan_report+0x39/0x40
>> [ 205.850085] [<ffffffff81025e3c>] ? snb_uncore_imc_event_del+0x6c/0xa0


If you pipe the report through
https://github.com/google/sanitizers/blob/master/address-sanitizer/tools/kasan_symbolize.py
it will give you line numbers and inlined frames.

> The best I can tell this maps to:
>
> static void snb_uncore_imc_event_del(struct perf_event *event, int flags)
> {
> struct intel_uncore_box *box = uncore_event_to_box(event);
> int i;
>
> snb_uncore_imc_event_stop(event, PERF_EF_UPDATE);
>
> for (i = 0; i < box->n_events; i++) {
>>>> if (event == box->event_list[i]) {
> --box->n_events;
> break;
> }
> }
> }
>
> Can this code be right? Does it actually remove the event?
> The similar code in
>
> static void uncore_pmu_event_del(struct perf_event *event, int flags)
>
> ....
>
> for (i = 0; i < box->n_events; i++) {
> if (event == box->event_list[i]) {
> uncore_put_event_constraint(box, event);
>
> for (++i; i < box->n_events; i++)
> box->event_list[i - 1] = box->event_list[i];
>
> --box->n_events;
> break;
> }
> }
>
>
> seems like it is more likely to be correct.
>
> Vince