[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231123100829.2e4addd0@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 10:08:29 +0100
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To: Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>,
Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@...omium.org>,
Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
Qiang Yu <yuq825@...il.com>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
Emma Anholt <emma@...olt.net>, Melissa Wen <mwen@...lia.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...labora.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 22/26] drm/shmem-helper: Don't free refcounted GEM
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 01:30:24 +0300
Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com> wrote:
> On 11/13/23 12:54, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 02:02:01 +0300
> > Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Don't free refcounted shmem object to prevent use-after-free bug that
> >> is worse than a memory leak.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c | 7 ++++---
> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c
> >> index 6dd087f19ea3..4253c367dc07 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c
> >> @@ -203,9 +203,10 @@ void drm_gem_shmem_free(struct drm_gem_shmem_object *shmem)
> >> if (obj->import_attach)
> >> drm_prime_gem_destroy(obj, shmem->sgt);
> >>
> >> - drm_WARN_ON(obj->dev, refcount_read(&shmem->vmap_use_count));
> >> - drm_WARN_ON(obj->dev, refcount_read(&shmem->pages_use_count));
> >> - drm_WARN_ON(obj->dev, refcount_read(&shmem->pages_pin_count));
> >> + if (drm_WARN_ON(obj->dev, refcount_read(&shmem->vmap_use_count)) ||
> >> + drm_WARN_ON(obj->dev, refcount_read(&shmem->pages_use_count)) ||
> >> + drm_WARN_ON(obj->dev, refcount_read(&shmem->pages_pin_count)))
> >> + return;
> >
> > I guess you're worried about ->sgt being referenced by the driver after
> > the GEM is destroyed. If we assume drivers don't cache the sgt and
> > always call get_pages_sgt() when they need it that shouldn't be an
> > issue. What we really don't want to release is the pages themselves,
> > but the GPU MMU might still have active mappings pointing to these
> > pages.
> >
> > In any case, I'm not against leaking the GEM object when any of these
> > counters are not zero, but can we at least have a comment in the
> > code explaining why we're doing that, so people don't have to go look
> > at the git history to figure it out.
>
> This patch is a minor improvement, it doesn't address any specific
> issue. This should be a common pattern in kernel. If you're giving a
> warning and know about the inevitable catastrophe, then avoid it if you can.
Sure, I'm just asking that we add a comment to explain why we leak
memory here. Is that too much to ask?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists