[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6b3d3815-ca7a-470e-993d-862f96249edb@quicinc.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 21:06:53 +0530
From: Pratyush Brahma <quic_pbrahma@...cinc.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, <will@...nel.org>
CC: <joro@...tes.org>, <jgg@...pe.ca>, <jsnitsel@...hat.com>,
<robdclark@...omium.org>, <quic_c_gdjako@...cinc.com>,
<dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<quic_charante@...cinc.com>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Prakash Gupta
<quic_guptap@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iommu/arm-smmu: Defer probe of clients after smmu
device bound
On 10/17/2024 7:24 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 15/10/2024 2:31 pm, Pratyush Brahma wrote:
>>
>> On 10/4/2024 2:34 PM, Pratyush Brahma wrote:
>>> Null pointer dereference occurs due to a race between smmu
>>> driver probe and client driver probe, when of_dma_configure()
>>> for client is called after the iommu_device_register() for smmu driver
>>> probe has executed but before the driver_bound() for smmu driver
>>> has been called.
>>>
>>> Following is how the race occurs:
>>>
>>> T1:Smmu device probe T2: Client device probe
>>>
>>> really_probe()
>>> arm_smmu_device_probe()
>>> iommu_device_register()
>>> really_probe()
>>> platform_dma_configure()
>>> of_dma_configure()
>>> of_dma_configure_id()
>>> of_iommu_configure()
>>> iommu_probe_device()
>>> iommu_init_device()
>>> arm_smmu_probe_device()
>>> arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode()
>>> driver_find_device_by_fwnode()
>>> driver_find_device()
>>> next_device()
>>> klist_next()
>>> /* null ptr
>>> assigned to smmu */
>>> /* null ptr dereference
>>> while smmu->streamid_mask */
>>> driver_bound()
>>> klist_add_tail()
>>>
>>> When this null smmu pointer is dereferenced later in
>>> arm_smmu_probe_device, the device crashes.
>>>
>>> Fix this by deferring the probe of the client device
>>> until the smmu device has bound to the arm smmu driver.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 021bb8420d44 ("iommu/arm-smmu: Wire up generic configuration
>>> support")
>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>> Co-developed-by: Prakash Gupta <quic_guptap@...cinc.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Prakash Gupta <quic_guptap@...cinc.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Brahma <quic_pbrahma@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> Fix kernel test robot warning
>>> Add stable kernel list in cc
>>> Link to v1:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241001055633.21062-1-quic_pbrahma@quicinc.com/
>>>
>>> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> index 723273440c21..7c778b7eb8c8 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> @@ -1437,6 +1437,9 @@ static struct iommu_device
>>> *arm_smmu_probe_device(struct device *dev)
>>> goto out_free;
>>> } else {
>>> smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode);
>>> + if (!smmu)
>>> + return ERR_PTR(dev_err_probe(dev, -EPROBE_DEFER,
>>> + "smmu dev has not bound yet\n"));
>>> }
>>> ret = -EINVAL;
>>
>>
>> Hi
>> Can someone please review this patch? Let me know if any further
>> information is required.
>
> This really shouldn't be leaking into drivers... :(
>
> Honestly, I'm now so fed up of piling on hacks around the fundamental
> mis-design here, I think it's finally time to blow everything else off
> and spend a few days figuring out the most expedient way to fix it
> properly once and for all. Watch this space...
>
> Thanks,
> Robin.
Hi Robin
Do you have any approaches in mind that you are currently considering or
exploring?
Thanks
Pratyush
Powered by blists - more mailing lists