The patch titled Subject: kfence: fix is_kfence_address() for addresses below KFENCE_POOL_SIZE has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is kfence-fix-is_kfence_address-for-addresses-below-kfence_pool_size.patch

This patch should soon appear at https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kfence-fix-is_kfence_address-for-a... and later at https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/kfence-fix-is_kfence_address-for-a...

Before you just go and hit "reply", please: a) Consider who else should be cc'ed b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's

*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***

The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated there every 3-4 working days

------------------------------------------------------ From: Marco Elver elver@google.com Subject: kfence: fix is_kfence_address() for addresses below KFENCE_POOL_SIZE

Originally the addr != NULL check was meant to take care of the case where __kfence_pool == NULL (KFENCE is disabled). However, this does not work for addresses where addr > 0 && addr < KFENCE_POOL_SIZE.

This can be the case on NULL-deref where addr > 0 && addr < PAGE_SIZE or any other faulting access with addr < KFENCE_POOL_SIZE. While the kernel would likely crash, the stack traces and report might be confusing due to double faults upon KFENCE's attempt to unprotect such an address.

Fix it by just checking that __kfence_pool != NULL instead.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210818130300.2482437-1-elver@google.com Fixes: 0ce20dd84089 ("mm: add Kernel Electric-Fence infrastructure") Signed-off-by: Marco Elver elver@google.com Reported-by: Kuan-Ying Lee Kuan-Ying.Lee@mediatek.com Acked-by: Alexander Potapenko glider@google.com Cc: Dmitry Vyukov dvyukov@google.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org [5.12+] Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton akpm@linux-foundation.org ---

include/linux/kfence.h | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--- a/include/linux/kfence.h~kfence-fix-is_kfence_address-for-addresses-below-kfence_pool_size +++ a/include/linux/kfence.h @@ -51,10 +51,11 @@ extern atomic_t kfence_allocation_gate; static __always_inline bool is_kfence_address(const void *addr) { /* - * The non-NULL check is required in case the __kfence_pool pointer was - * never initialized; keep it in the slow-path after the range-check. + * The __kfence_pool != NULL check is required to deal with the case + * where __kfence_pool == NULL && addr < KFENCE_POOL_SIZE. Keep it in + * the slow-path after the range-check! */ - return unlikely((unsigned long)((char *)addr - __kfence_pool) < KFENCE_POOL_SIZE && addr); + return unlikely((unsigned long)((char *)addr - __kfence_pool) < KFENCE_POOL_SIZE && __kfence_pool); }

/** _

Patches currently in -mm which might be from elver@google.com are

kfence-fix-is_kfence_address-for-addresses-below-kfence_pool_size.patch kfence-show-cpu-and-timestamp-in-alloc-free-info.patch