linux-kernel - Re: CVE-2024-26628: drm/amdkfd: Fix lock dependency warning

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: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:09:38 +0000
From: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: cve@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehling@....com>
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-26628: drm/amdkfd: Fix lock dependency warning

On Fri, 08 Mar 2024, Michal Hocko wrote:

> On Wed 06-03-24 06:46:11, Greg KH wrote:
> [...]
> >  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > 
> >        CPU0                    CPU1
> >        ----                    ----
> >   lock(&svms->lock);
> >                                lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> >                                lock(&svms->lock);
> >   lock((work_completion)(&svm_bo->eviction_work));
> > 
> > I believe this cannot really lead to a deadlock in practice, because
> > svm_range_evict_svm_bo_worker only takes the mmap_read_lock if the BO
> > refcount is non-0. That means it's impossible that svm_range_bo_release
> > is running concurrently. However, there is no good way to annotate this.
> 
> OK, so is this even a bug (not to mention a security/weakness)?

Looks like the patch fixes a warning which can crash some kernels.  So
the CVE appears to be fixing that, rather than the impossible deadlock.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]