linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.18 074/158] uio: fix possible circular locking dependency

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: <20180917211714.682812666@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 18 Sep 2018 00:41:44 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>,
        Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.18 074/158] uio: fix possible circular locking dependency

4.18-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>

[ Upstream commit b34e9a15b37b8ddbf06a4da142b0c39c74211eb4 ]

The call trace:
XXX/1910 is trying to acquire lock:
 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff97008c87>] might_fault+0x57/0xb0

but task is already holding lock:
 (&idev->info_lock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffc0638a06>] uio_write+0x46/0x130 [uio]

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #1 (&idev->info_lock){+.+...}:
       [<ffffffff96f31fc9>] lock_acquire+0x99/0x1e0
       [<ffffffff975edad3>] mutex_lock_nested+0x93/0x410
       [<ffffffffc063873d>] uio_mmap+0x2d/0x170 [uio]
       [<ffffffff97016b58>] mmap_region+0x428/0x650
       [<ffffffff97017138>] do_mmap+0x3b8/0x4e0
       [<ffffffff96ffaba3>] vm_mmap_pgoff+0xd3/0x120
       [<ffffffff97015261>] SyS_mmap_pgoff+0x1f1/0x270
       [<ffffffff96e387c2>] SyS_mmap+0x22/0x30
       [<ffffffff975ff315>] system_call_fastpath+0x1c/0x21

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
       [<ffffffff96f30e9c>] __lock_acquire+0xdac/0x15f0
       [<ffffffff96f31fc9>] lock_acquire+0x99/0x1e0
       [<ffffffff97008cb4>] might_fault+0x84/0xb0
       [<ffffffffc0638a74>] uio_write+0xb4/0x130 [uio]
       [<ffffffff9706ffa3>] vfs_write+0xc3/0x1f0
       [<ffffffff97070e2a>] SyS_write+0x8a/0x100
       [<ffffffff975ff315>] system_call_fastpath+0x1c/0x21

other info that might help us debug this:
 Possible unsafe locking scenario:
       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&idev->info_lock);
                               lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
                               lock(&idev->info_lock);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***
1 lock held by XXX/1910:
 #0:  (&idev->info_lock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffc0638a06>] uio_write+0x46/0x130 [uio]

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 1910 Comm: XXX Kdump: loaded Not tainted #1
Hardware name: VMware, Inc. VMware Virtual Platform/440BX Desktop Reference Platform, BIOS 6.00 05/19/2017
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff975e9211>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b
 [<ffffffff975e260a>] print_circular_bug+0x1f9/0x207
 [<ffffffff96f2f6a7>] check_prevs_add+0x957/0x960
 [<ffffffff96f30e9c>] __lock_acquire+0xdac/0x15f0
 [<ffffffff96f2fb19>] ? mark_held_locks+0xb9/0x140
 [<ffffffff96f31fc9>] lock_acquire+0x99/0x1e0
 [<ffffffff97008c87>] ? might_fault+0x57/0xb0
 [<ffffffff97008cb4>] might_fault+0x84/0xb0
 [<ffffffff97008c87>] ? might_fault+0x57/0xb0
 [<ffffffffc0638a74>] uio_write+0xb4/0x130 [uio]
 [<ffffffff9706ffa3>] vfs_write+0xc3/0x1f0
 [<ffffffff9709349c>] ? fget_light+0xfc/0x510
 [<ffffffff97070e2a>] SyS_write+0x8a/0x100
 [<ffffffff975ff315>] system_call_fastpath+0x1c/0x21

Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 drivers/uio/uio.c |   16 ++++++----------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/uio/uio.c
+++ b/drivers/uio/uio.c
@@ -622,6 +622,12 @@ static ssize_t uio_write(struct file *fi
 	ssize_t retval;
 	s32 irq_on;
 
+	if (count != sizeof(s32))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (copy_from_user(&irq_on, buf, count))
+		return -EFAULT;
+
 	mutex_lock(&idev->info_lock);
 	if (!idev->info) {
 		retval = -EINVAL;
@@ -633,21 +639,11 @@ static ssize_t uio_write(struct file *fi
 		goto out;
 	}
 
-	if (count != sizeof(s32)) {
-		retval = -EINVAL;
-		goto out;
-	}
-
 	if (!idev->info->irqcontrol) {
 		retval = -ENOSYS;
 		goto out;
 	}
 
-	if (copy_from_user(&irq_on, buf, count)) {
-		retval = -EFAULT;
-		goto out;
-	}
-
 	retval = idev->info->irqcontrol(idev->info, irq_on);
 
 out: