Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference in rb_insert_color

[Eric Biggers]

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 08:50:40AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >
> > The line number in lib/rbtree.c seems to be slightly off.  Looking at the
> > disassembly:
> >
> >         ffffffff825b5ea0 <rb_insert_color>:
> >         ffffffff825b5ea0:       55                      push   %rbp
> >         ffffffff825b5ea1:       48 8b 17                mov    (%rdi),%rdx
> >         ffffffff825b5ea4:       48 89 e5                mov    %rsp,%rbp
> >         ffffffff825b5ea7:       48 85 d2                test   %rdx,%rdx
> >         ffffffff825b5eaa:       0f 84 4c 01 00 00       je     ffffffff825b5ffc <rb_insert_color+0x15c>
> >         ffffffff825b5eb0:       48 8b 02                mov    (%rdx),%rax
> >         ffffffff825b5eb3:       a8 01                   test   $0x1,%al
> >         ffffffff825b5eb5:       75 5e                   jne    ffffffff825b5f15 <rb_insert_color+0x75>
> >         ffffffff825b5eb7:       48 8b 48 08             mov    0x8(%rax),%rcx
> >
> > It crashed on 'mov 0x8(%rax),%rcx' which corresponds to
> > 'tmp = gparent->rb_right;' at lib/rbtree.c:131.  So 'parent' was the root node,
> > but its color was red, while it is supposed to be black.
> >
> > No idea how that happened, but it's almost certainly not an ext4 bug.  In fact
> > there is another report of this same crash that has a different call trace:
> >
> >         Call Trace:
> >          key_alloc_serial security/keys/key.c:170 [inline]
> >          key_alloc+0x54c/0x5b0 security/keys/key.c:319
> >          keyring_alloc+0x4d/0xb0 security/keys/keyring.c:503
> >          install_process_keyring_to_cred.part.3+0x38/0x80 security/keys/process_keys.c:192
> >          install_process_keyring_to_cred security/keys/process_keys.c:634 [inline]
> >          install_process_keyring security/keys/process_keys.c:217 [inline]
> >          lookup_user_key+0x4ed/0x7c0 security/keys/process_keys.c:574
> >          SYSC_add_key security/keys/keyctl.c:114 [inline]
> >          SyS_add_key+0xec/0x260 security/keys/keyctl.c:62
> >          entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1f/0x96
> 
> 
> My first hypothesis for an non-explainable, non-reproducible
> corruption would be a data race. Is there all locking in place?

It doesn't seem to be a locking problem.  In the ext4 case the rbtree is
associated with a struct file's dir_private_info, which is protected by
->f_pos_lock (taken early in sys_getdents()).  And in the keyrings case, the
rbtree is protected by key_serial_lock.

Eric