| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <d3c6e149a2794551ba4570bdd7f1b7e7@realtek.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 01:53:44 +0000
From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
To: Ondřej Jirman <megi@....cz>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "open list:REALTEK WIRELESS DRIVER (rtw89)"
<linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] wifi: rtw89: Fix inadverent sharing of struct ieee80211_supported_band data
Ondřej Jirman <megi@....cz> wrote:
>
> Internally wiphy writes to individual channels in this structure,
> so we must not share one static definition of channel list between
> multiple device instances, because that causes hard to debug
> breakage.
>
> For example, with two rtw89 driven devices in the system, channel
> information may get incoherent, preventing channel use.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Jirman <megi@....cz>
> ---
>
> This patch relates to this report of mine:
>
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/2goskmst4na36v42p2bs47uernp6kh3gzpadhr3u3r2yvyoxlg@bfprgq2qae7p
> /T/#u
>
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
> index cc9b014457ac..ae22954f5f5c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
> @@ -4398,16 +4398,44 @@ static void rtw89_init_he_eht_cap(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
> _ieee80211_set_sband_iftype_data(sband, iftype_data, idx);
> }
>
> +static struct ieee80211_supported_band *rtw89_copy_sband(const struct ieee80211_supported_band *sband)
prefer naming rtw89_core_sband_dup().
> +{
> + struct ieee80211_supported_band *copy = kmemdup(sband, sizeof(*sband), GFP_KERNEL);
Then, '*dup'.
> +
> + copy->channels = kmemdup(sband->channels, sizeof(struct ieee80211_channel) * sband->n_channels,
> GFP_KERNEL);
I'm planning to use devm_ series to manage sband data, so we don't need to
free them one by one. Do you interest to adjust that along with this patchset?
I mean adding additional patches to adjust the code before this patch, and
make them as a patchset.
For kmemdup, the corresponding one is devm_kmemdup.
The line is too long. Less than 80 characters is preferred.
> + if (!copy->channels) {
> + kfree(copy);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + copy->bitrates = kmemdup(sband->bitrates, sizeof(struct ieee80211_rate) * sband->n_bitrates,
> GFP_KERNEL);
Since you have duplicated arrays of channels and bitrate, we should add const
to them, like:
static const struct ieee80211_channel rtw89_channels_{2ghz,5ghz,6ghz}[]
static const struct ieee80211_rate rtw89_bitrates[]
> + if (!copy->bitrates) {
> + kfree(copy->channels);
> + kfree(copy);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + return copy;
> +}
> +
> +static void rtw89_free_sband(const struct ieee80211_supported_band *sband)
> +{
> + if (sband) {
> + kfree(sband->bitrates);
> + kfree(sband->channels);
> + kfree(sband);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int rtw89_core_set_supported_band(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev)
> {
> struct ieee80211_hw *hw = rtwdev->hw;
> struct ieee80211_supported_band *sband_2ghz = NULL, *sband_5ghz = NULL;
> struct ieee80211_supported_band *sband_6ghz = NULL;
> - u32 size = sizeof(struct ieee80211_supported_band);
> u8 support_bands = rtwdev->chip->support_bands;
>
> if (support_bands & BIT(NL80211_BAND_2GHZ)) {
> - sband_2ghz = kmemdup(&rtw89_sband_2ghz, size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + sband_2ghz = rtw89_copy_sband(&rtw89_sband_2ghz);
> if (!sband_2ghz)
> goto err;
> rtw89_init_ht_cap(rtwdev, &sband_2ghz->ht_cap);
> @@ -4416,7 +4444,7 @@ static int rtw89_core_set_supported_band(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev)
> }
>
> if (support_bands & BIT(NL80211_BAND_5GHZ)) {
> - sband_5ghz = kmemdup(&rtw89_sband_5ghz, size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + sband_5ghz = rtw89_copy_sband(&rtw89_sband_5ghz);
> if (!sband_5ghz)
> goto err;
> rtw89_init_ht_cap(rtwdev, &sband_5ghz->ht_cap);
> @@ -4426,7 +4454,7 @@ static int rtw89_core_set_supported_band(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev)
> }
>
> if (support_bands & BIT(NL80211_BAND_6GHZ)) {
> - sband_6ghz = kmemdup(&rtw89_sband_6ghz, size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + sband_6ghz = rtw89_copy_sband(&rtw89_sband_6ghz);
> if (!sband_6ghz)
> goto err;
> rtw89_init_he_eht_cap(rtwdev, NL80211_BAND_6GHZ, sband_6ghz);
> @@ -4445,9 +4473,9 @@ static int rtw89_core_set_supported_band(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev)
> kfree((__force void *)sband_5ghz->iftype_data);
> if (sband_6ghz)
> kfree((__force void *)sband_6ghz->iftype_data);
> - kfree(sband_2ghz);
> - kfree(sband_5ghz);
> - kfree(sband_6ghz);
> + rtw89_free_sband(sband_2ghz);
> + rtw89_free_sband(sband_5ghz);
> + rtw89_free_sband(sband_6ghz);
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> @@ -4461,9 +4489,9 @@ static void rtw89_core_clr_supported_band(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev)
> kfree((__force void *)hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ]->iftype_data);
> if (hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_6GHZ])
> kfree((__force void *)hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_6GHZ]->iftype_data);
> - kfree(hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_2GHZ]);
> - kfree(hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ]);
> - kfree(hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_6GHZ]);
> + rtw89_free_sband(hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_2GHZ]);
> + rtw89_free_sband(hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ]);
> + rtw89_free_sband(hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_6GHZ]);
> hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_2GHZ] = NULL;
> hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ] = NULL;
> hw->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_6GHZ] = NULL;
Like I mentioned above, with devm_ series, I suppose this function can be
removed entirely.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists