linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: use cpufreq_cpu_get to avoid cpufreq

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]

Message-ID: <5317CBF2.40908@nvidia.com>
Date:	Wed, 5 Mar 2014 17:14:26 -0800
From:	Aaron Plattner <aplattner@...dia.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC:	"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: use cpufreq_cpu_get to avoid cpufreq_get race
 conditions

On 03/05/14 17:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 04, 2014 12:42:15 PM Aaron Plattner wrote:
>> If a module calls cpufreq_get while cpufreq is initializing, it's possible for
>> it to be called after cpufreq_driver is set but before cpufreq_cpu_data is
>> written during subsys_interface_register.  This happens because cpufreq_get
>> doesn't take the cpufreq_driver_lock around its use of cpufreq_cpu_data.
>
> Is this a theoretical race, or can you actually reproduce it?  If so, on what
> system/driver?  Or are there any bug reports related to this you can point me
> to?

It reproduces on my Arch Linux system at home with the nvidia driver, 
and there has been at least one bug report that looks like the same thing:

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=177934

I reproduced the problem with v3.13.5, then applied this change and was 
able to boot successfully 10/10 times.  So I guess that means you can add

Tested-by: Aaron Plattner <aplattner@...dia.com>

to the commit.

-- Aaron

>> Fix this by using cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu) to look up the policy rather than reading
>> it out of cpufreq_cpu_data directly.  cpufreq_cpu_get takes the appropriate
>> locks to prevent this race from happening.
>>
>> Since it's possible for policy to be NULL if the caller passes in an invalid CPU
>> number or calls the function before cpufreq is initialized, delete the
>> BUG_ON(!policy) and simply return 0.  Don't try to return -ENOENT because that's
>> negative and the function returns an unsigned integer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Plattner <aplattner@...dia.com>
>
> Viresh, have you seen this?
>
>> ---
>>   drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 21 +++++++--------------
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> index 8d19f7c..158d0b5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> @@ -1447,23 +1447,16 @@ static unsigned int __cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu)
>>    */
>>   unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu)
>>   {
>> -	struct cpufreq_policy *policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
>> +	struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>   	unsigned int ret_freq = 0;
>>
>> -	if (cpufreq_disabled() || !cpufreq_driver)
>> -		return -ENOENT;
>> -
>> -	BUG_ON(!policy);
>> -
>> -	if (!down_read_trylock(&cpufreq_rwsem))
>> -		return 0;
>> -
>> -	down_read(&policy->rwsem);
>> -
>> -	ret_freq = __cpufreq_get(cpu);
>> +	if (policy) {
>> +		down_read(&policy->rwsem);
>> +		ret_freq = __cpufreq_get(cpu);
>> +		up_read(&policy->rwsem);
>>
>> -	up_read(&policy->rwsem);
>> -	up_read(&cpufreq_rwsem);
>> +		cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>> +	}
>>
>>   	return ret_freq;
>>   }
>>
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/