| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <532B3E93.7060902@hurleysoftware.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:16:35 -0400
From: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
To: balbi@...com
CC: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Muralidharan Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>,
linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Huang Shijie <b32955@...escale.com>
Subject: Re: hci_ldsic nested locking problem
On 03/20/2014 02:25 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 02:21:17PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
>> On 03/20/2014 02:11 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 01:31:40PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
>>>> [ +cc Huang Shijie ]
>>>>
>>>> On 03/20/2014 01:16 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 04:42:16PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 11:34 -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> when 8250 driver calls uart_write_wakeup(), the tty port lock is already
>>>>>>> taken. hci_ldisc.c's implementation of ->write_wakeup() calls
>>>>>>> tty->ops->write() to actually send the characters, but that call will
>>>>>>> try to acquire the same port lock again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looking at other line disciplines that looks like a bug in hci_ldisc.c.
>>>>>>> Am I correct to assume that ->write_wakeup() is supposed to *just*
>>>>>>> wakeup the bottom half so we handle ->write() in another context ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it legal to call tty->ops->write() from within ->write_wakeup() ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It isn't because you might send all the bytes and go
>>>>>>
>>>>>> write
>>>>>> write_wakeup
>>>>>> write
>>>>>> write wakeup
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and recurse
>>>>>
>>>>> cool, so there really is a bug in hci_ldisc. Marcel, any tips on how do
>>>>> you want this to be sorted out ?
>>>>
>>>> hci_uart_tx_wakeup() should perform the I/O as work.
>>>> FWIW, this was reported by Huang Shijie back on Dec 6.
>>>>
>>>> I'd fix it but I have no way to test it.
>>>
>>> here's a build-tested only patch which is waiting for testing from other
>>> colleagues who've got a platform to reproduce the problem:
>>
>> Where's the cancel_work_sync() on teardown?
>
> here, as a patch too this time:
Thanks. Minor edits below but, strictly speaking, not necessary.
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
> From 3ee6b74833f154df64a6164476b854846206a3f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:20:10 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] bluetooth: hci_ldisc: fix deadlock condition
>
> LDISCs shouldn't call tty->ops->write() from within
> ->write_wakeup().
>
> ->write_wakeup() is called with port lock taken and
> IRQs disabled, tty->ops->write() will try to acquire
> the same port lock and we will deadlock.
>
I know you found it independently but ?
Reported-by: Huang Shijie <b32955@...escale.com>
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
> ---
> drivers/bluetooth/hci_ldisc.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
> drivers/bluetooth/hci_uart.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_ldisc.c b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_ldisc.c
> index 6e06f6f..ecdd765 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_ldisc.c
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_ldisc.c
> @@ -118,10 +118,6 @@ static inline struct sk_buff *hci_uart_dequeue(struct hci_uart *hu)
>
> int hci_uart_tx_wakeup(struct hci_uart *hu)
> {
> - struct tty_struct *tty = hu->tty;
> - struct hci_dev *hdev = hu->hdev;
> - struct sk_buff *skb;
> -
> if (test_and_set_bit(HCI_UART_SENDING, &hu->tx_state)) {
> set_bit(HCI_UART_TX_WAKEUP, &hu->tx_state);
> return 0;
> @@ -129,6 +125,18 @@ int hci_uart_tx_wakeup(struct hci_uart *hu)
>
> BT_DBG("");
>
> + schedule_work(&hu->write_work);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void hci_uart_write_work(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct hci_uart *hu = container_of(work, struct hci_uart, init_ready);
> + struct tty_struct *tty = hu->tty;
> + struct hci_dev *hdev = hu->hdev;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> +
+ /* FIXME: if bad skb length or tty->ops->write() returns < 0 ??? */
> restart:
> clear_bit(HCI_UART_TX_WAKEUP, &hu->tx_state);
>
> @@ -153,7 +161,6 @@ restart:
> goto restart;
>
> clear_bit(HCI_UART_SENDING, &hu->tx_state);
> - return 0;
> }
>
> static void hci_uart_init_work(struct work_struct *work)
> @@ -281,6 +288,7 @@ static int hci_uart_tty_open(struct tty_struct *tty)
> tty->receive_room = 65536;
>
> INIT_WORK(&hu->init_ready, hci_uart_init_work);
> + INIT_WORK(&hu->write_work, hci_uart_write_work);
>
> spin_lock_init(&hu->rx_lock);
>
> @@ -318,6 +326,8 @@ static void hci_uart_tty_close(struct tty_struct *tty)
> if (hdev)
> hci_uart_close(hdev);
>
> + cancel_work_sync(&hy->write_work);
> +
> if (test_and_clear_bit(HCI_UART_PROTO_SET, &hu->flags)) {
> if (hdev) {
> if (test_bit(HCI_UART_REGISTERED, &hu->flags))
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_uart.h b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_uart.h
> index fffa61f..12df101 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_uart.h
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_uart.h
> @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ struct hci_uart {
> unsigned long hdev_flags;
>
> struct work_struct init_ready;
> + struct work_struct write_work;
>
> struct hci_uart_proto *proto;
> void *priv;
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists