linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] media: uvc: don't do DMA on stack

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]

Date:   Tue, 22 Jun 2021 12:12:46 +0200
From:   Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc:     'Mauro Carvalho Chehab' <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linuxarm@...wei.com" <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        "mauro.chehab@...wei.com" <mauro.chehab@...wei.com>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] media: uvc: don't do DMA on stack

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 08:07:12AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab
> > Sent: 21 June 2021 14:40
> > 
> > As warned by smatch:
> > 	drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_v4l2.c:911 uvc_ioctl_g_input() error: doing dma on the stack (&i)
> > 	drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_v4l2.c:943 uvc_ioctl_s_input() error: doing dma on the stack (&i)
> > 
> > those two functions call uvc_query_ctrl passing a pointer to
> > a data at the DMA stack. those are used to send URBs via
> > usb_control_msg(). Using DMA stack is not supported and should
> > not work anymore on modern Linux versions.
> > 
> > So, use a kmalloc'ed buffer.
> ...
> > +	buf = kmalloc(1, GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!buf)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> >  	ret = uvc_query_ctrl(chain->dev, UVC_GET_CUR, chain->selector->id,
> >  			     chain->dev->intfnum,  UVC_SU_INPUT_SELECT_CONTROL,
> > -			     &i, 1);
> > +			     buf, 1);
> 
> Thought...
> 
> Is kmalloc(1, GFP_KERNEL) guaranteed to return a pointer into
> a cache line that will not be accessed by any other code?
> 
> (This is slightly weaker than requiring a cache-line aligned
> pointer - but very similar.)
> 
> Without that guarantee you can't use the returned buffer for
> read dma unless the memory accesses are coherent.

For USB buffers, that should be fine, we have been doing this for
decades now...

thanks,

greg k-h