linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ALSA: hda: Fix widget

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 1 Jul 2019 08:57:21 -0700
From:   Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>
To:     Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Amadeusz S*awi*ski" <amadeuszx.slawinski@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ALSA: hda: Fix widget_mutex incomplete protection

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:09 AM Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 23:22:19 +0200,
> Evan Green wrote:
> >
> > The widget_mutex was introduced to serialize callers to
> > hda_widget_sysfs_{re}init. However, its protection of the sysfs widget array
> > is incomplete. For example, it is acquired around the call to
> > hda_widget_sysfs_reinit(), which actually creates the new array, but isn't
> > still acquired when codec->num_nodes and codec->start_nid is updated. So
> > the lock ensures one thread sets up the new array at a time, but doesn't
> > ensure which thread's value will end up in codec->num_nodes. If a larger
> > num_nodes wins but a smaller array was set up, the next call to
> > refresh_widgets() will touch free memory as it iterates over codec->num_nodes
> > that aren't there.
> >
> > The widget_lock really protects both the tree as well as codec->num_nodes,
> > start_nid, and end_nid, so make sure it's held across that update. It should
> > also be held during snd_hdac_get_sub_nodes(), so that a very old read from that
> > function doesn't end up clobbering a later update.
>
> OK, right, this fix is needed no matter whether to take my other
> change to skip hda_widget_sysfs_init() call in
> hda_widget_sysfs_reinit().
>
> However...
>
> > While in there, move the exit mutex call inside the function. This moves the
> > mutex closer to the data structure it protects and removes a requirement of
> > acquiring the somewhat internal widget_lock before calling sysfs_exit.
>
> ... this doesn't look better from consistency POV.  The whole code in
> hdac_sysfs.c doesn't take any lock in itself.  The protection is
> supposed to be done in the caller side.  So, let's keep as is now.

Ok.

>
> Also...
>
> >       codec->num_nodes = nums;
> >       codec->start_nid = start_nid;
> >       codec->end_nid = start_nid + nums;
> > +     mutex_unlock(&codec->widget_lock);
> >       return 0;
> > +
> > +unlock:
> > +     mutex_unlock(&codec->widget_lock);
> > +     return err;
>
> There is no need of two mutex_unlock() here.  They can be unified,
>
>         codec->num_nodes = nums;
>         codec->start_nid = start_nid;
>         codec->end_nid = start_nid + nums;
>   unlock:
>         mutex_unlock(&codec->widget_lock);
>         return err;
>
> Could you refresh this and resubmit?

Sure, will do. Thanks for taking a look.