Re: BUG: KASAN: stack-out-of-bounds in unwind_get_return_address

[Scott Bauer]

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 12:35:07PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:13:01AM -0700, Scott Bauer wrote:
> > This is super easy to repro ontop of 4.9-rc7:
> > run pm-suspend and it hits every time
> > 
> > 
> > [  968.667086] ==================================================================
> > [  968.667091] BUG: KASAN: stack-out-of-bounds in unwind_get_return_address+0x11d/0x130 at addr ffff8803867d7878
> > [  968.667092] Read of size 8 by task pm-suspend/7774
> > [  968.667095] page:ffffea000e19f5c0 count:0 mapcount:0 mapping:          (null) index:0x0
> > [  968.667096] flags: 0x2ffff0000000000()
> > [  968.667097] page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected
> 
> Thanks for reporting this.  I think it's a false positive caused by the
> fact that the suspend and resume happen at different contexts.
> 
> Can you test if this patch fixes it?
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c
> index 4858733..62bd046 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c
> @@ -115,6 +115,9 @@ int x86_acpi_suspend_lowlevel(void)
>  	pause_graph_tracing();
>  	do_suspend_lowlevel();
>  	unpause_graph_tracing();
> +
> +	kasan_unpoison_stack_below_sp();
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/include/linux/kasan.h b/include/linux/kasan.h
> index 820c0ad..ca36126 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kasan.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kasan.h
> @@ -45,6 +45,12 @@ void kasan_unpoison_shadow(const void *address, size_t size);
>  
>  void kasan_unpoison_task_stack(struct task_struct *task);
>  void kasan_unpoison_stack_above_sp_to(const void *watermark);
> +asmlinkage void kasan_unpoison_task_stack_below(const void *watermark);
> +
> +static inline void kasan_unpoison_stack_below_sp(void)
> +{
> +	kasan_unpoison_task_stack_below(__builtin_frame_address(0));
> +}
>  
>  void kasan_alloc_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order);
>  void kasan_free_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order);


Thanks for the quick turn-around. This patch worked for me. You can add me as
tested by if you need.