linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: codecs: Fix atomicity violation in snd_soc_component_get

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <173082469577.77847.18367085097740716832.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 16:38:15 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: support.opensource@...semi.com, lgirdwood@...il.com, perex@...ex.cz, 
 tiwai@...e.com, Qiu-ji Chen <chenqiuji666@...il.com>
Cc: linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
 baijiaju1990@...il.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: codecs: Fix atomicity violation in
 snd_soc_component_get_drvdata()

On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 18:12:16 +0800, Qiu-ji Chen wrote:
> An atomicity violation occurs when the validity of the variables
> da7219->clk_src and da7219->mclk_rate is being assessed. Since the entire
> assessment is not protected by a lock, the da7219 variable might still be
> in flux during the assessment, rendering this check invalid.
> 
> To fix this issue, we recommend adding a lock before the block
> if ((da7219->clk_src == clk_id) && (da7219->mclk_rate == freq)) so that
> the legitimacy check for da7219->clk_src and da7219->mclk_rate is
> protected by the lock, ensuring the validity of the check.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] ASoC: codecs: Fix atomicity violation in snd_soc_component_get_drvdata()
      commit: 1157733344651ca505e259d6554591ff156922fa

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark