linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] dma-buf/reservation: shouldn't kfree staged when slot available

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: <BLUPR12MB04494D7F15FC7D557D58488484DA0@BLUPR12MB0449.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 07:55:22 +0000
From:   "Liu, Monk" <Monk.Liu@....com>
To:     "Koenig, Christian" <Christian.Koenig@....com>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] dma-buf/reservation: shouldn't kfree staged when slot
 available

Hi Christian

You are right on that part of obj-staged is set to NULL in add_fence, 
So my following question will be why we kfree(obj->staged) in reserve_shared() if staged is always NULL in that point ?

Thanks 
/Monk

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian König [mailto:ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com] 
Sent: 2018年2月28日 16:27
To: Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu@....com>; dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma-buf/reservation: shouldn't kfree staged when slot available

Am 28.02.2018 um 07:44 schrieb Monk Liu:
> under below scenario the obj->fence would refer to a wild pointer:
>
> 1,call reservation_object_reserved_shared
> 2,call reservation_object_add_shared_fence
> 3,call reservation_object_reserved_shared
> 4,call reservation_object_add_shared_fence
>
> in step 1, staged is allocated,
>
> in step 2, code path will go reservation_object_add_shared_replace()
> and obj->fence would be assigned as staged (through RCU_INIT_POINTER)
>
> in step 3, obj->staged will be freed(by simple kfree), which make 
> obj->fence point to a wild pointer...


Well that explanation is still nonsense. See
reservation_object_add_shared_fence:
>         obj->staged = NULL;

Among the first things reservation_object_add_shared_fence() does is it 
sets obj->staged to NULL.

So step 3 will not free anything and we never have a wild pointer.

Regards,
Christian.

>
> in step 4, code path will go reservation_object_add_shared_inplace()
> and inside it the @fobj (which equals to @obj->staged, set by above steps)
> is already a wild pointer
>
> should remov the kfree on staged in reservation_object_reserve_shared()
>
> Change-Id: If7c01f1b4be3d3d8a81efa90216841f79ab1fc1c
> Signed-off-by: Monk Liu <Monk.Liu@....com>
> ---
>   drivers/dma-buf/reservation.c | 7 ++-----
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/reservation.c b/drivers/dma-buf/reservation.c
> index 375de41..b473ccc 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/reservation.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/reservation.c
> @@ -74,12 +74,9 @@ int reservation_object_reserve_shared(struct reservation_object *obj)
>   	old = reservation_object_get_list(obj);
>   
>   	if (old && old->shared_max) {
> -		if (old->shared_count < old->shared_max) {
> -			/* perform an in-place update */
> -			kfree(obj->staged);
> -			obj->staged = NULL;
> +		if (old->shared_count < old->shared_max)
>   			return 0;
> -		} else
> +		else
>   			max = old->shared_max * 2;
>   	} else
>   		max = 4;