[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y6VvEmfgbQOmW2cN@kadam>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2022 12:04:18 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
To: Prashanth K <quic_prashk@...cinc.com>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
'Greg Kroah-Hartman' <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Gustavo A . R . Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
John Keeping <john@...anate.com>,
Pratham Pratap <quic_ppratap@...cinc.com>,
Vincent Pelletier <plr.vincent@...il.com>,
Udipto Goswami <quic_ugoswami@...cinc.com>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"# 5 . 15" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: usb: f_fs: Fix CFI failure in ki_complete
On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 06:21:03PM +0530, Prashanth K wrote:
>
>
> On 14-12-22 11:05 pm, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > Sent: 12 December 2022 13:35
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 06:54:24PM +0530, Prashanth K wrote:
> > > > Function pointer ki_complete() expects 'long' as its second
> > > > argument, but we pass integer from ffs_user_copy_worker. This
> > > > might cause a CFI failure, as ki_complete is an indirect call
> > > > with mismatched prototype. Fix this by typecasting the second
> > > > argument to long.
> > >
> > > "might"? Does it or not? If it does, why hasn't this been reported
> > > before?
> >
> > Does the cast even help at all.
> Actually I also have these same questions
> - why we haven't seen any instances other than this one?
> - why its not seen on other indirect function calls?
>
> Here is the the call stack of the failure that we got.
>
> [ 323.288681][ T7] Kernel panic - not syncing: CFI failure (target:
> 0xffffffe5fc811f98)
> [ 323.288710][ T7] CPU: 6 PID: 7 Comm: kworker/u16:0 Tainted: G S W
> OE 5.15.41-android13-8-g5ffc5644bd20 #1
> [ 323.288730][ T7] Workqueue: adb ffs_user_copy_worker.cfi_jt
> [ 323.288752][ T7] Call trace:
> [ 323.288755][ T7] dump_backtrace.cfi_jt+0x0/0x8
> [ 323.288772][ T7] dump_stack_lvl+0x80/0xb8
> [ 323.288785][ T7] panic+0x180/0x444
> [ 323.288797][ T7] find_check_fn+0x0/0x218
> [ 323.288810][ T7] ffs_user_copy_worker+0x1dc/0x204
> [ 323.288822][ T7] kretprobe_trampoline.cfi_jt+0x0/0x8
> [ 323.288837][ T7] worker_thread+0x3ec/0x920
> [ 323.288850][ T7] kthread+0x168/0x1dc
> [ 323.288859][ T7] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> [ 323.288866][ T7] SMP: stopping secondary CPUs
>
> And from address to line translation, we got know the issue is from
> ffs_user_copy_worker+0x1dc/0x204
> ||
> io_data->kiocb->ki_complete(io_data->kiocb, ret);
>
> And "find_check_fn" was getting invoked from ki_complete. Only thing that I
> found suspicious about ki_complete() is its argument types. That's why I
> pushed this patch here, so that we can discuss this out here.
I think the problem is more likely whatever ->ki_complete() points to
but I have no idea what that is on your system. You're using an Android
kernel so it could be something out of tree as well...
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists