linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] kobject: make sure parent is not released before children

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: <20200415133122.GB3461248@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:31:22 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, anders.roxell@...aro.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] kobject: make sure parent is not released before
 children

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 04:10:18PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:21:03AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:47 AM Heikki Krogerus
> > <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Greg,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 08:11:54AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/lib/kobject.c b/lib/kobject.c
> > > > > index 83198cb37d8d..5921e2470b46 100644
> > > > > --- a/lib/kobject.c
> > > > > +++ b/lib/kobject.c
> > > > > @@ -663,6 +663,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(kobject_get_unless_zero);
> > > > >   */
> > > > >  static void kobject_cleanup(struct kobject *kobj)
> > > > >  {
> > > > > +   struct kobject *parent = kobj->parent;
> > > > >     struct kobj_type *t = get_ktype(kobj);
> > > > >     const char *name = kobj->name;
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -680,6 +681,9 @@ static void kobject_cleanup(struct kobject *kobj)
> > > > >             kobject_uevent(kobj, KOBJ_REMOVE);
> > > > >     }
> > > > >
> > > > > +   /* make sure the parent is not released before the (last) child */
> > > > > +   kobject_get(parent);
> > > > > +
> > > > >     /* remove from sysfs if the caller did not do it */
> > > > >     if (kobj->state_in_sysfs) {
> > > > >             pr_debug("kobject: '%s' (%p): auto cleanup kobject_del\n",
> > > > > @@ -693,6 +697,8 @@ static void kobject_cleanup(struct kobject *kobj)
> > > > >             t->release(kobj);
> > > > >     }
> > > > >
> > > > > +   kobject_put(parent);
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > > No, please don't do this.
> > > >
> > > > A child device should have always incremented the parent already if it
> > > > was correctly registered.  We have had this patch been proposed multiple
> > > > times over the years, and every time it was, we said no and went and
> > > > fixed the real issue which was with the user of the interface.
> > >
> > > The parent ref count is incremented by the child, that is not the
> > > problem. The problem is that when that child is released, if it's the
> > > last child of the parent, and there are no other users for the parent,
> > > then the parent is actually released _before_ the child. And that
> > > happens in the above function kobject_cleanup().
> > 
> > In fact, it happens in kobject_del() invoked by kobject_cleanup() AFAICS.
> > 
> > So it appears incorrect to use kobject_del() as is in the latter.
> > 
> > > We can work around the problem by taking a reference to the parent
> > > separately, but we have to do that everywhere separately (which I
> > > guess is exactly what has been done so far). That workaroud still does
> > > not really fix the core problem. The core problem is still that
> > > lib/kboject.c is allowing the parent kobject to be released before the
> > > child kobject, and that quite simply should not be allowed to happen.
> > >
> > > I don't have a problem if you want to have a better solution for this,
> > > but the solution really can't anymore be that we are always expected
> > > to separately increment the parent's ref count with every type of
> > > kobject.
> > 
> > An alternative might be to define something like __kobject_del() doing
> > everything that kobject_del() does *without* the
> > kobject_put(kobj->parent).
> > 
> > Then, kobject_del() could be defined as something like (pseudocode):
> > 
> > kobject_del(kobj)
> > {
> >     kobject *perent = kobj->parent;
> > 
> >     __kobject_del(kobj);
> >     kobject_put(parent);
> > }
> > 
> > and kobject_cleanup() could call __kobject_del() instead of
> > kobject_del() and then do the last kobject_put(parent) when it is done
> > with the child.
> > 
> > Would that work?
> 
> I think so. Greg, what do you think?

Hm, maybe.  Can someone test it out with the reproducer?

thanks,

greg k-h