[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dd30778d-2b12-f784-d00e-3b977358e5da@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 00:09:05 +0800
From: Phi Nguyen <phind.uet@...il.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: jirislaby@...nel.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
syzbot+97388eb9d31b997fe1d0@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: Fix data race between tiocsti() and flush_to_ldisc()
On 8/18/2021 10:03 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 02:35:53AM +0800, Phi Nguyen wrote:
>> On 8/13/2021 3:33 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nguyen Dinh Phi <phind.uet@...il.com>
>>>> Reported-by: syzbot+97388eb9d31b997fe1d0@...kaller.appspotmail.com
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/tty/tty_io.c | 2 ++
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
>>>> index e8532006e960..746fe13a2054 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
>>>> @@ -2307,8 +2307,10 @@ static int tiocsti(struct tty_struct *tty, char __user *p)
>>>> ld = tty_ldisc_ref_wait(tty);
>>>> if (!ld)
>>>> return -EIO;
>>>> + tty_buffer_lock_exclusive(tty->port);
>>>> if (ld->ops->receive_buf)
>>>> ld->ops->receive_buf(tty, &ch, &mbz, 1);
>>>> + tty_buffer_unlock_exclusive(tty->port);
>>>
>>> Did this fix the syzbot reported issue?
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> greg k-h
>>> Yes, this fixed the syzbot reported issue.
>>
>> The lock is grabbed in flush_to_ldisc() and paste_selection().
>> Actually, I follow the document in tty_buffer.c, where it say the callers to
>> receive_buff() other than flush_to_ldisc() need to exclude the kworker from
>> concurrent use of the line discipline.
>>
>> And function tiocsti() has the following comment:
>> /* FIXME: may race normal receive processing */
>> that why I add lock in this function.
>
> As you are fixing this FIXME, please remove it in this patch, otherwise
> we will not know it is resolved :)
>
> Can you add that to the change and submit a new version?
>
Yes, I will submit a new version.
> Also, this should go to stable kernels, right? Any idea how far back?
>
I have no idea about this question, but I see it meets specified
requirements in stable-kernel-rules.rst
BR,
Phi.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists