linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] of/pci: Fix memory leak in of_pci_get_host_bridge

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:39:32 +0800
From:   jeffy <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...omium.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        toshi.kani@....com, Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] of/pci: Fix memory leak in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources

Hi Rob & Dmitry,

On 03/24/2017 06:58 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Jeffy Chen <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com> wrote:
>>> Currently we only free the allocated resource struct when error.
>>> This would cause memory leak after pci_free_resource_list.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeffy Chen <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> Don't change the resource_list_create_entry's behavior.
>>>
>>>   drivers/of/of_pci.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------
>>>   1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_pci.c b/drivers/of/of_pci.c
>>> index 0ee42c3..a0ec246 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/of/of_pci.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_pci.c
>>> @@ -190,8 +190,7 @@ int of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources(struct device_node *dev,
>>>                          struct list_head *resources, resource_size_t *io_base)
>>>   {
>>>          struct resource_entry *window;
>>> -       struct resource *res;
>>> -       struct resource *bus_range;
>>> +       struct resource res;
>>>          struct of_pci_range range;
>>>          struct of_pci_range_parser parser;
>>>          char range_type[4];
>>> @@ -200,24 +199,24 @@ int of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources(struct device_node *dev,
>>>          if (io_base)
>>>                  *io_base = (resource_size_t)OF_BAD_ADDR;
>>>
>>> -       bus_range = kzalloc(sizeof(*bus_range), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> -       if (!bus_range)
>>> -               return -ENOMEM;
>>> -
>>>          pr_info("host bridge %s ranges:\n", dev->full_name);
>>>
>>> -       err = of_pci_parse_bus_range(dev, bus_range);
>>> +       err = of_pci_parse_bus_range(dev, &res);
>>>          if (err) {
>>> -               bus_range->start = busno;
>>> -               bus_range->end = bus_max;
>>> -               bus_range->flags = IORESOURCE_BUS;
>>> -               pr_info("  No bus range found for %s, using %pR\n",
>>> -                       dev->full_name, bus_range);
>>> +               res.start = busno;
>>> +               res.end = bus_max;
>>> +               res.flags = IORESOURCE_BUS;
>>> +               pr_info("  No bus range found for %s\n", dev->full_name);
>>>          } else {
>>> -               if (bus_range->end > bus_range->start + bus_max)
>>> -                       bus_range->end = bus_range->start + bus_max;
>>> +               if (res.end > res.start + bus_max)
>>> +                       res.end = res.start + bus_max;
>>> +       }
>>> +       window = pci_add_resource(resources, NULL);
>>> +       if (!window) {
>>> +               err = -ENOMEM;
>>> +               goto parse_failed;
>>>          }
>>> -       pci_add_resource(resources, bus_range);
>>> +       *window->res = res;
>>
>> Well, now this seems racy. You add a blank resource to the list first
>> and then fill it in.
>>
>
> Huh? There is absolutely no guarantees for concurrent access here.
> pcI_add_resource_offset() first adds a resource and then modifies
> offset. Here we add an empty resource and then fill it in.
currently, we are using of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources in this pattern:

create resource list:
         LIST_HEAD(res);
...
add resources into the list:
         err = of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources(dev->of_node, 0, 0xff,
                                                &res, &io_base);
...
walk over the list:
         /* Get the I/O and memory ranges from DT */
         resource_list_for_each_entry(win, &res) {

so only of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources is accessing this list at that 
time.

and an empty resource is harmless i think(with zero size and flags) ;)

maybe i should add some comments in the patch

>
> Thanks.
>