linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_serdev: Init hci_uart proto

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: <D250C682-CAD9-48FD-9B82-25E6934AAC0D@holtmann.org>
Date:   Tue, 2 Jan 2018 21:45:44 +0100
From:   Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To:     John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc:     Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
        Rob Herring <rob.herring@...aro.org>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Ronald Tschalaer <ronald@...ovation.ch>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        "open list:BLUETOOTH DRIVERS" <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_serdev: Init hci_uart proto_lock to avoid
 oops

Hi John,

>>>> John Stultz reports a boot time crash with the HiKey board (which uses
>>>> hci_serdev) occurring in hci_uart_tx_wakeup().  That function is
>>>> contained in hci_ldisc.c, but also called from the newer hci_serdev.c.
>>>> It acquires the proto_lock in struct hci_uart and it turns out that we
>>>> forgot to init the lock in the serdev code path, thus causing the crash.
>>>> 
>>>> John bisected the crash to commit 67d2f8781b9f ("Bluetooth: hci_ldisc:
>>>> Allow sleeping while proto locks are held"), but the issue was present
>>>> before and the commit merely exposed it.  (Perhaps by luck, the crash
>>>> did not occur with rwlocks.)
>>>> 
>>>> Init the proto_lock in the serdev code path to avoid the oops.
>>>> 
>> [snip]
>>> patch has been applied to bluetooth-next tree.
>> 
>> Sorry to be a nuisance if its just a timing thing, but I wanted to
>> follow up on this just to make sure it didn't fall through the cracks,
>> as I noticed w/ -rc3 it hasn't landed yet.
> 
> Happy new year all,
>  Just wanted to send another ping on this as it seems it hasn't made
> it into -rc6. Did this get missed as being tagged as a (at least
> functional) regression fix?

since it wasn’t marked as urgent fix, it never went on the path to -rc. It is on the path for the next release. And then can be included in -stable if needed.

Regards

Marcel