On 8/4/26 12:41 PM, Mingyu Wang wrote: > Hi Petr, > >> I'm confused by this description and I'm not sure what problem the patch >> is trying to solve. A task is not normally terminated in the middle of >> a syscall. This could happen only if it hits an oops. However, that >> means there is an earlier bug and the module loader isn't expected to be >> resilient to a post-oops state. >> >> Could you clarify the scenario that you ran into? > > Thank you for the review. You are entirely correct; the task did not > terminate during a normal syscall, but was indeed killed by a prior > oops. > > Here is the exact scenario discovered during driver fuzzing by our > automated virtual device modeling tool, DevGen: > > 1. A `modprobe` task (PID 433) concurrently loaded a faulty driver > (the `atlantic` net driver in our trace). > 2. It passed the idempotent() check and added its stack-allocated > `struct idempotent` node to the global `idem_hash` list. > 3. During init_module_from_file(), the `atlantic` driver hit a fatal > oops in its hardware init path (aq_hw_write_reg+0x39/0x50). > 4. The kernel initiated oops recovery, terminating the `modprobe` task > (exited with preempt_count 1) and freeing its kernel stack. > 5. The oops recovery path does not clean up the `idem_hash` list, > leaving a dangling pointer to the freed stack in the global list. > 6. A subsequent module loading attempt traversed `idem_hash`, > dereferenced the stale stack pointer, and triggered a secondary > KASAN use-after-free and GPF.
Thanks for explaining the scenario. > > While the root cause of the initial crash lies within the specific > buggy driver, the current stack allocation allows an isolated driver > oops to corrupt a global synchronization primitive, preventing any > further module loading across the entire system. An oopsed task can leave behind various kernel structures in an inconsistent state, such as unreleased locks, incorrect reference counts and leaked objects. It is expected that the kernel may behave strangely afterward and this can result in subsequent problems, such as deadlocks or crashes. Loading a module is a heavyweight operation that injects new code and data into the kernel. If it ends in an oops, I think it is fair that no additional modules can be inserted. I don't see that the module loader is doing anything wrong or behaving differently from other kernel components in this regard. -- Cheers, Petr
