[PATCH] kexec: fix out of the ELF headers buffer issue in syscall kexec_file_load()

[Minfei Huang]

On 09/28/15 at 02:41pm, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> On big machines have CPU number that's very nearly to consume whole ELF
> headers buffer that's page aligned, 4096, 8192... Then the page fault error
> randomly happened.
> 
> This patch modified the code in fill_up_crash_elf_data() by using
> walk_system_ram_res() instead of walk_system_ram_range() to count the max
> number of crash memory ranges. That's because the walk_system_ram_range()
> filters out small memory regions that reside the same page, but
> walk_system_ram_res() does not.
> 
> The oringial page fault issue sometimes happened on big machines when
> preparing ELF headers:
> 
> [  305.291522] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffffc90613fc9000
> [  305.299621] IP: [<ffffffff8103d645>] prepare_elf64_ram_headers_callback+0x165/0x260
> [  305.308300] PGD e000032067 PUD 6dcbec54067 PMD 9dc9bdeb067 PTE 0
> [  305.315393] Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP
> [...snip]
> [  305.420953] task: ffff8e1c01ced600 ti: ffff8e1c03ec2000 task.ti: ffff8e1c03ec2000
> [  305.429292] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8103d645>]  [<ffffffff8103d645>] prepare_elf64_ra
> m_headers_callback+0x165/0x260
> [...snip]
> 
> After tracing prepare_elf64_headers() and prepare_elf64_ram_headers_callback(),
> the code uses walk_system_ram_res() to fill-in crash memory regions information
> to program header, so it counts those small memory regions that reside in a
> page area. But, when kernel was using walk_system_ram_range() in
> fill_up_crash_elf_data() to count the number of crash memory regions, it
> filters out small regions.
> 
> I printed those small memory regions, for example:
> 
> kexec: Get nr_ram ranges. vaddr=0xffff880077592258 paddr=0x77592258, sz=0xdc0
> 
> Base on the logic of walk_system_ram_range(), this memory region will be
> filter out:
> 
> pfn = (0x77592258 + 0x1000 - 1) >> 12 = 0x77593
> end_pfn = (0x77592258 + 0xfc0 -1 + 1) >> 12 = 0x77593
> end_pfn - pfn = 0x77593 - 0x77593 = 0  <=== if (end_pfn > pfn)      [FAIL]
> 
> So, the max_nr_ranges that counted by kernel doesn't include small memory
> regions. That causes the page fault issue happened in later code path for
> preparing EFL headers,
> 
> This issue was hided on small machine that doesn't have too many CPU because
> the free space of ELF headers buffer can cover the number of small memory
> regions. But, when the machine has more CPUs or the number of memory regions
> very nearly to consume whole page aligned buffer, e.g. 4096, 8192... Then
> issue will happen randomly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lee, Chun-Yi <jlee at suse.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/crash.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/crash.c b/arch/x86/kernel/crash.c
> index e068d66..ad273b3d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/crash.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/crash.c
> @@ -185,8 +185,7 @@ void native_machine_crash_shutdown(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  }
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE
> -static int get_nr_ram_ranges_callback(unsigned long start_pfn,
> -				unsigned long nr_pfn, void *arg)
> +static int get_nr_ram_ranges_callback(u64 start, u64 end, void *arg)
>  {
>  	int *nr_ranges = arg;

Ccing kexec maillist.

Good cacthing.

It is appreciate if you can change the above type to unsigned int
accordingly.

Thanks
Minfei

>  
> @@ -214,7 +213,7 @@ static void fill_up_crash_elf_data(struct crash_elf_data *ced,
>  
>  	ced->image = image;
>  
> -	walk_system_ram_range(0, -1, &nr_ranges,
> +	walk_system_ram_res(0, -1, &nr_ranges,
>  				get_nr_ram_ranges_callback);
>  
>  	ced->max_nr_ranges = nr_ranges;
> -- 
> 2.1.4
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/