linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm/tpm_tis: Free IRQ if probing fails

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: <7df7f8bd-c65e-1435-7e82-b9f4ecd729de@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Apr 2020 20:11:15 +0200
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm/tpm_tis: Free IRQ if probing fails

Hi,

On 4/13/20 8:07 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 12:04:25PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi Jarkko,
>>
>> On 4/12/20 7:04 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>> Call devm_free_irq() if we have to revert to polling in order not to
>>> unnecessarily reserve the IRQ for the life-cycle of the driver.
>>>
>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 4.5.x
>>> Reported-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
>>> Fixes: e3837e74a06d ("tpm_tis: Refactor the interrupt setup")
>>> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 5 ++++-
>>>    1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>>> index 27c6ca031e23..ae6868e7b696 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>>> @@ -1062,9 +1062,12 @@ int tpm_tis_core_init(struct device *dev, struct tpm_tis_data *priv, int irq,
>>>    		if (irq) {
>>>    			tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(chip, intmask, IRQF_SHARED,
>>>    						 irq);
>>> -			if (!(chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ))
>>> +			if (!(chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ)) {
>>>    				dev_err(&chip->dev, FW_BUG
>>>    					"TPM interrupt not working, polling instead\n");
>>> +				devm_free_irq(chip->dev.parent, priv->irq,
>>> +					      chip);
>>> +			}
>>
>> My initial plan was actually to do something similar, but if the probe code
>> is actually ever fixed to work as intended again then this will lead to a
>> double free as then the IRQ-test path of tpm_tis_send() will have called
>> disable_interrupts() which already calls devm_free_irq().
>>
>> You could check for chip->irq != 0 here to avoid that.
>>
>> But it all is rather messy, which is why I went with the "#if 0" approach
>> in my patch.
> 
> I think it is right way to fix it. It is a bug independent of the issue
> we are experiencing.
> 
> However, what you are suggesting should be done in addition. Do you have
> a patch in place or do you want me to refine mine?

I do not have a patch ready for this, if you can refine yours that would
be great.

Regards,

Hans