linux-kernel - Re: Is usb_hcd_giveback_urb() allowed in task context?

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: <20201005152840.GA2372768@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Oct 2020 17:28:40 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:     Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        Valentina Manea <valentina.manea.m@...il.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Nazime Hande Harputluoglu <handeharputlu@...gle.com>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Is usb_hcd_giveback_urb() allowed in task context?

On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:22:18AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 05:08:11PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > Dear USB and USB/IP maintainers,
> > 
> > While fuzzing the USB/IP stack with syzkaller we've stumbled upon an issue.
> > 
> > Currently kcov (the subsystem that is used for coverage collection)
> > USB-related callbacks assume that usb_hcd_giveback_urb() can only be
> > called from interrupt context, as indicated by the comment before the
> > function definition.
> 
> The primary reason for this restriction (as far as I'm aware) is because 
> the routine uses spin_lock/spin_unlock rather than the 
> _irqsave/_irqrestore variants.  There's also a small efficiency issue: 
> In the vast majority of cases involving real host controllers, the 
> routine _will_ be called in interrupt context.  So we optimized for that 
> case.
> 
> >  In the USB/IP code, however, it's called from the
> > task context (see the stack trace below).
> > 
> > Is this something that is allowed and we need to fix kcov? Or is this
> > a bug in USB/IP?
> 
> It's a bug in USB/IP.  Interrupts should be disabled when it calls 
> usb_hcd_giveback_urb().

But that's not always the case when we have host controllers running
with threaded interrupts, right?  Or do they still disable interrupts?

thanks,

greg k-h