linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 3/7] drm: lock drm_global

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: <YSdltHVQnIr+vkTn@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:   Thu, 26 Aug 2021 11:58:12 +0200
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:     Desmond Cheong Zhi Xi <desmondcheongzx@...il.com>
Cc:     maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org,
        tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...ux.ie, daniel@...ll.ch,
        sumit.semwal@...aro.org, christian.koenig@....com,
        jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com, joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com,
        rodrigo.vivi@...el.com, chris@...is-wilson.co.uk,
        ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com, matthew.auld@...el.com,
        dan.carpenter@...cle.com, tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com,
        matthew.d.roper@...el.com, lucas.demarchi@...el.com,
        karthik.b.s@...el.com, jose.souza@...el.com,
        manasi.d.navare@...el.com, airlied@...hat.com,
        aditya.swarup@...el.com, andrescj@...omium.org,
        linux-graphics-maintainer@...are.com, zackr@...are.com,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/7] drm: lock drm_global_mutex earlier in the ioctl
 handler

On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 10:01:18AM +0800, Desmond Cheong Zhi Xi wrote:
> In a future patch, a read lock on drm_device.master_rwsem is
> held in the ioctl handler before the check for ioctl
> permissions. However, this inverts the lock hierarchy of
> drm_global_mutex --> master_rwsem.
> 
> To avoid this, we do some prep work to grab the drm_global_mutex
> before checking for ioctl permissions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Desmond Cheong Zhi Xi <desmondcheongzx@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c | 18 +++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c
> index d25713b09b80..158629d88319 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c
> @@ -772,19 +772,19 @@ long drm_ioctl_kernel(struct file *file, drm_ioctl_t *func, void *kdata,
>  	if (drm_dev_is_unplugged(dev))
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
> +	/* Enforce sane locking for modern driver ioctls. */
> +	if (unlikely(drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_LEGACY)) && !(flags & DRM_UNLOCKED))

Maybe have a local bool locked_ioctl for this so it's extremely clear it's
the same condition in both?

Either way: Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>

> +		mutex_lock(&drm_global_mutex);
> +
>  	retcode = drm_ioctl_permit(flags, file_priv);
>  	if (unlikely(retcode))
> -		return retcode;
> +		goto out;
>  
> -	/* Enforce sane locking for modern driver ioctls. */
> -	if (likely(!drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_LEGACY)) ||
> -	    (flags & DRM_UNLOCKED))
> -		retcode = func(dev, kdata, file_priv);
> -	else {
> -		mutex_lock(&drm_global_mutex);
> -		retcode = func(dev, kdata, file_priv);
> +	retcode = func(dev, kdata, file_priv);
> +
> +out:
> +	if (unlikely(drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_LEGACY)) && !(flags & DRM_UNLOCKED))
>  		mutex_unlock(&drm_global_mutex);
> -	}
>  	return retcode;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_ioctl_kernel);
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch