[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <92fe8e95-bc01-4d7d-9678-8cfc55cc4a7b@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:24:39 -0400
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Sam Sun <samsun1006219@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, swboyd@...omium.org,
ricardo@...liere.net, hkallweit1@...il.com, heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com,
mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com, royluo@...gle.com,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, xrivendell7@...il.com
Subject: Re: [Linux kernel bug] general protection fault in disable_store
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 02:52:27PM +0800, Sam Sun wrote:
> Dear developers and maintainers,
>
> We encountered a general protection fault in function disable_store.
> It is tested against the latest upstream linux (tag 6.9-rc3). C repro
> and kernel config are attached to this email. Kernel crash log is
> listed below.
> ```
> general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
> 0xdffffc0000000000: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
> KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000000-0x0000000000000007]
> CPU: 1 PID: 9459 Comm: syz-executor414 Not tainted 6.7.0-rc7 #2
> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014
> RIP: 0010:disable_store+0xd0/0x3d0 drivers/usb/core/port.c:88
> Code: 02 00 00 4c 8b 75 40 4d 8d be 58 ff ff ff 4c 89 ff e8 a4 20 fa
> ff 48 89 c2 48 89 c5 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c
> 02 00 0f 85 b0 02 00 00 48 8b 45 00 48 8d bb 34 05 00 00 48
> RSP: 0018:ffffc90006e3fc08 EFLAGS: 00010246
> RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: ffff88801d4d4008 RCX: ffffffff86706be8
> RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff86706c4d RDI: 0000000000000005
> RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000005 R09: 0000000000000000
> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 1ffff92000dc7f85
> R13: ffff88810f4bfb18 R14: ffff88801d4d10a8 R15: ffff88801d4d1000
> FS: 00007fa0af71b640(0000) GS:ffff888135c00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> CR2: 00007fa0af71a4b8 CR3: 0000000022f5f000 CR4: 0000000000750ef0
> DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> PKRU: 55555554
> ----------------
> Code disassembly (best guess):
> 0: 02 00 add (%rax),%al
> 2: 00 4c 8b 75 add %cl,0x75(%rbx,%rcx,4)
> 6: 40 rex
> 7: 4d 8d be 58 ff ff ff lea -0xa8(%r14),%r15
> e: 4c 89 ff mov %r15,%rdi
> 11: e8 a4 20 fa ff call 0xfffa20ba
> 16: 48 89 c2 mov %rax,%rdx
> 19: 48 89 c5 mov %rax,%rbp
> 1c: 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 movabs $0xdffffc0000000000,%rax
> 23: fc ff df
> 26: 48 c1 ea 03 shr $0x3,%rdx
> * 2a: 80 3c 02 00 cmpb $0x0,(%rdx,%rax,1) <--
> trapping instruction
> 2e: 0f 85 b0 02 00 00 jne 0x2e4
> 34: 48 8b 45 00 mov 0x0(%rbp),%rax
> 38: 48 8d bb 34 05 00 00 lea 0x534(%rbx),%rdi
> 3f: 48 rex.W
> ```
> We analyzed the root cause of this bug. When calling disable_store()
> in drivers/usb/core/port.c, if function authorized_store() is calling
> usb_deauthorized_device() concurrently, the usb_interface will be
> removed by usb_disable_device. However, in function disable_store,
> usb_hub_to_struct_hub() would try to deref interface, causing
> nullptr-deref. We also tested other functions in
> drivers/usb/core/port.c. So far we haven't found a similar problem.
I don't see how this explanation could be correct. disable_store() is a
sysfs attribute file for the port device, so when it is called the port
device structure must still be registered. The interface structure
doesn't get removed until after usb_disable_device() calls device_del(),
which won't return until hub_disconnect() returns, which won't happen
until after the port devices are unregistered, which doesn't happen
until disable_store() calls sysfs_break_active_protection(), which is
after the call to usb_hub_to_struct_hub().
Can you do a little extra debugging to find out exactly which C
statement causes the trap? The disassembly above indicates the trap
happens during a compare against 0 inside disable_store() -- not inside
usb_hub_to_struct_hub(). Can you figure out which comparison that is?
Alan Stern
> If you have any questions, please contact us.
>
> Reported by Yue Sun <samsun1006219@...il.com>
> Reported by xingwei lee <xrivendell7@...il.com>
>
> Best Regards,
> Yue
Powered by blists - more mailing lists