netdev - Re: [PATCH net] tg3: Avoid NULL pointer dereference in tg3_io_error

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 27 Sep 2016 14:42:43 -0700
From:   Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
To:     "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Siva Reddy Kallam <siva.kallam@...adcom.com>,
        Prashant Sreedharan <prashant@...adcom.com>,
        Michael Chan <mchan@...adcom.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Milton Miller <miltonm@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] tg3: Avoid NULL pointer dereference in tg3_io_error_detected()

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Guilherme G. Piccoli
<gpiccoli@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 09/27/2016 05:58 PM, Michael Chan wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Guilherme G. Piccoli
>> <gpiccoli@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Milton Miller <miltonm@...ibm.com>
>>>
>>> While the driver is probing the adapter, an error may occur before the
>>> netdev structure is allocated and attached to pci_dev. In this case,
>>> not only netdev isn't available, but the tg3 private structure is also
>>> not available as it is just math from the NULL pointer, so dereferences
>>> must be skipped.
>>>
>>> The following trace is seen when the error is triggered:
>>>
>>>    [1.402247] Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address
>>> 0x00001a99
>>>    [1.402410] Faulting instruction address: 0xc0000000007e33f8
>>>    [1.402450] Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1]
>>>    [1.402481] SMP NR_CPUS=2048 NUMA PowerNV
>>>    [1.402513] Modules linked in:
>>>    [1.402545] CPU: 0 PID: 651 Comm: eehd Not tainted 4.4.0-36-generic
>>> #55-Ubuntu
>>>    [1.402591] task: c000001fe4e42a20 ti: c000001fe4e88000 task.ti:
>>> c000001fe4e88000
>>>    [1.402742] NIP: c0000000007e33f8 LR: c0000000007e3164 CTR:
>>> c000000000595ea0
>>>    [1.402787] REGS: c000001fe4e8b790 TRAP: 0300   Not tainted
>>> (4.4.0-36-generic)
>>>    [1.402832] MSR: 9000000100009033 <SF,HV,EE,ME,IR,DR,RI,LE>  CR:
>>> 28000422  XER: 20000000
>>>    [1.403058] CFAR: c000000000008468 DAR: 0000000000001a99 DSISR:
>>> 42000000 SOFTE: 1
>>>    GPR00: c0000000007e3164 c000001fe4e8ba10 c0000000015c5e00
>>> 0000000000000000
>>>    GPR04: 0000000000000001 0000000000000000 0000000000000039
>>> 0000000000000299
>>>    GPR08: 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 c000001fe4e88000
>>> 0000000000000006
>>>    GPR12: 0000000000000000 c00000000fb40000 c0000000000e6558
>>> c000003ca1bffd00
>>>    GPR16: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>>> 0000000000000000
>>>    GPR20: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>>> c000000000d52768
>>>    GPR24: c000000000d52740 0000000000000100 c000003ca1b52000
>>> 0000000000000002
>>>    GPR28: 0000000000000900 0000000000000000 c00000000152a0c0
>>> c000003ca1b52000
>>>    [1.404226] NIP [c0000000007e33f8] tg3_io_error_detected+0x308/0x340
>>>    [1.404265] LR [c0000000007e3164] tg3_io_error_detected+0x74/0x340
>>>
>>> This patch avoids the NULL pointer dereference by moving the access after
>>> the netdev NULL pointer check on tg3_io_error_detected().
>>>
>>> Fixes: 0486a063b1ff ("tg3: prevent ifup/ifdown during PCI error
>>> recovery")
>>> Fixes: dfc8f370316b ("net/tg3: Release IRQs on permanent error")
>>> Tested-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Milton Miller <miltonm@...ibm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>
>>
>> Looks good.  Do we need to add !netdev check in tg3_io_resume()?
>
>
> Thanks Michael. It's a good point - I didn't trigger any error without the
> check, but looking at error handlers, every one seems to have this check
> except tg3_io_resume().
>
> Do you want us to send a v2 including this check? Or maybe another patch?
>

I think v2 should be fine.  The additional check is very much related
to the v1 patch.

I will ACK it once you send v2.  Thanks.