netdev - Re: [PATCH] mac80211: fix race in ieee80211_register

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

Message-ID: <CAFA6WYPBef1w2YG8vDTnRK9N3Tjt-vQahpYd61H6twsRuT8YZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:30:01 +0530
From:   Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:     linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, kuba@...nel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matthias-Peter Schöpfer 
        <matthias.schoepfer@...inx.io>,
        "Berg Philipp (HAU-EDS)" <Philipp.Berg@...bherr.com>,
        "Weitner Michael (HAU-EDS)" <Michael.Weitner@...bherr.com>,
        Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
        Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: fix race in ieee80211_register_hw()

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 18:14, Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 17:51 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > A race condition leading to a kernel crash is observed during invocation
> > of ieee80211_register_hw() on a dragonboard410c device having wcn36xx
> > driver built as a loadable module along with a wifi manager in user-space
> > waiting for a wifi device (wlanX) to be active.
> >
> > Sequence diagram for a particular kernel crash scenario:
> >
> >     user-space  ieee80211_register_hw()  RX IRQ
> >     +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |<---wlan0---wiphy_register()      |
> >        |----start wlan0---->|             |
> >        |                    |<---IRQ---(RX packet)
> >        |              Kernel crash        |
> >        |              due to unallocated  |
> >        |              workqueue.          |
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |       alloc_ordered_workqueue()  |
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |              Misc wiphy init.    |
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |            ieee80211_if_add()    |
> >        |                    |             |
> >
> > As evident from above sequence diagram, this race condition isn't specific
> > to a particular wifi driver but rather the initialization sequence in
> > ieee80211_register_hw() needs to be fixed.
>
> Indeed, oops.
>
> > So re-order the initialization
> > sequence and the updated sequence diagram would look like:
> >
> >     user-space  ieee80211_register_hw()  RX IRQ
> >     +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |       alloc_ordered_workqueue()  |
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |              Misc wiphy init.    |
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |<---wlan0---wiphy_register()      |
> >        |----start wlan0---->|             |
> >        |                    |<---IRQ---(RX packet)
> >        |                    |             |
> >        |            ieee80211_if_add()    |
> >        |                    |             |
>
> Makes sense.
>
> > @@ -1254,6 +1250,14 @@ int ieee80211_register_hw(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
> >               local->sband_allocated |= BIT(band);
> >       }
> >
> > +     rtnl_unlock();
> > +
> > +     result = wiphy_register(local->hw.wiphy);
> > +     if (result < 0)
> > +             goto fail_wiphy_register;
> > +
> > +     rtnl_lock();
>
> I'm a bit worried about this unlock/relock here though.
>
> I think we only need the RTNL for the call to
> ieee80211_init_rate_ctrl_alg() and then later ieee80211_if_add(), so
> perhaps we can move that a little closer?
>

Sure, will move rtnl_unlock() to just after call to
ieee80211_init_rate_ctrl_alg().

> All the stuff between is really just setting up local stuff, so doesn't
> really need to worry?
>

Okay.

-Sumit

> johannes
>
>