linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: cancel any pending policy update work scheduled before freeing

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: <CAJZ5v0hBP4Zitd+V0s3zohd=gd6fKRHKN5RnwAPyfNXv3VX+iQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Oct 2019 01:50:36 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: cancel any pending policy update work
 scheduled before freeing

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 12:59 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> wrote:
>
> Schedules policy update work may end up racing with the freeing of the
> policy and unregistering the driver.
>
> One possible race is as below where the cpufreq_driver is unregistered
> but the scheduled work gets executed at later stage when cpufreq_driver
> is NULL(i.e. after freeing the policy and driver)
>
> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000001c
> pgd = (ptrval)
> [0000001c] *pgd=80000080204003, *pmd=00000000
> Internal error: Oops: 206 [#1] SMP THUMB2
> Modules linked in:
> CPU: 0 PID: 34 Comm: kworker/0:1 Not tainted 5.4.0-rc3-00006-g67f5a8081a4b #86
> Hardware name: ARM-Versatile Express
> Workqueue: events handle_update
> PC is at cpufreq_set_policy+0x58/0x228
> LR is at dev_pm_qos_read_value+0x77/0xac
> Control: 70c5387d  Table: 80203000  DAC: fffffffd
> Process kworker/0:1 (pid: 34, stack limit = 0x(ptrval))
>         (cpufreq_set_policy) from (refresh_frequency_limits.part.24+0x37/0x48)
>         (refresh_frequency_limits.part.24) from (handle_update+0x2f/0x38)
>         (handle_update) from (process_one_work+0x16d/0x3cc)
>         (process_one_work) from (worker_thread+0xff/0x414)
>         (worker_thread) from (kthread+0xff/0x100)
>         (kthread) from (ret_from_fork+0x11/0x28)
>
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> v1->v2:
>         - Dropped check for work_pending as it can still be racy
>         - Changed from flush_work to cancel_work_sync
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index e93cba29fbb2..8ad9c2859841 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1279,6 +1279,8 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>         }
>
>         dev_pm_qos_remove_request(policy->min_freq_req);
> +       /* cancel any pending policy->update work before freeing the policy */
> +       cancel_work_sync(&policy->update);
>         kfree(policy->min_freq_req);
>
>         cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);
> --

Applying as a fix for 5.4, thanks!