[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f0c94748-7d09-41c0-9557-b37a1f6a8f7b@baylibre.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 10:00:56 -0500
From: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@...nix.com>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: accel: fxls8962af: Fix use after free in
fxls8962af_fifo_flush
On 6/2/25 5:50 AM, Sean Nyekjaer wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 05:53:02PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On Sat, 24 May 2025 12:34:09 +0200
>> Sean Nyekjaer <sean@...nix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> fxls8962af_fifo_flush() uses indio_dev->active_scan_mask (with
>>> iio_for_each_active_channel()) without making sure the indio_dev
>>> stays in buffer mode.
>>> There is a race if indio_dev exits buffer mode in the middle of the
>>> interrupt that flushes the fifo. Fix this by calling
>>> iio_device_claim_buffer_mode() to ensure indio_dev can't exit buffer
>>> mode during the flush.
>>>
>>> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000 when read
>>> [...]
>>> _find_first_bit_le from fxls8962af_fifo_flush+0x17c/0x290
>>> fxls8962af_fifo_flush from fxls8962af_interrupt+0x80/0x178
>>> fxls8962af_interrupt from irq_thread_fn+0x1c/0x7c
>>> irq_thread_fn from irq_thread+0x110/0x1f4
>>> irq_thread from kthread+0xe0/0xfc
>>> kthread from ret_from_fork+0x14/0x2c
>>>
>>> Fixes: 79e3a5bdd9ef ("iio: accel: fxls8962af: add hw buffered sampling")
>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@...nix.com>
>>
>> That's nasty and a case I'd never thought about. Most of the
>> races around disabling end up with an extra sample or two which then gets
>> dropped because there are no buffers enabled.
>>
>> We need to consider the active scan mask as part of the buffer state.
>> So effectively taking mlock if we enter this code will delay the state
>> transition (and change of active_scan_mask until after this interrupt is done).
>>
>> If David's synchronize_irq() is enough maybe that's a lighter weight path?
>
> I agree if David's proposal is sufficient, I can try it.
> It's something we have seen once in some unrelated testing, so it's
> quite hard to reproduce :/
>
> /Sean
Maybe temporarily adding a time delay of one sample period towards the
beginning of fxls8962af_interrupt() could make it easier to reproduce?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists