netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [[PATCH v2 iwl-next] v2 2/4] idpf: Acquire the lock before accessing the xn->salt

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: <0b5a2906-0018-4a6b-9837-56c8a2786f02@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:04:47 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>, Tony Nguyen
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<google-lan-reviews@...glegroups.com>, Manoj Vishwanathan
	<manojvishy@...gle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, "Eric
 Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>, <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [[PATCH v2 iwl-next] v2 2/4] idpf: Acquire the
 lock before accessing the xn->salt

On 8/28/24 23:29, Jacob Keller wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/26/2024 11:10 AM, Manoj Vishwanathan wrote:
>> The transaction salt was being accessed before acquiring the
>> idpf_vc_xn_lock when idpf has to forward the virtchnl reply.
>>
>> Fixes: 34c21fa894a1a (“idpf: implement virtchnl transaction manager”)
>> Signed-off-by: Manoj Vishwanathan <manojvishy@...gle.com>
>> ---
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
> 
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c | 3 ++-
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c
>> index 70986e12da28..30eec674d594 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c
>> @@ -612,14 +612,15 @@ idpf_vc_xn_forward_reply(struct idpf_adapter *adapter,
>>   		return -EINVAL;
>>   	}
>>   	xn = &adapter->vcxn_mngr->ring[xn_idx];
>> +	idpf_vc_xn_lock(xn);
> 
> Could look at implementing cleanup.h based locking here so that we could
> use guard or scope_guard and not have to litter the exit paths with unlocks.

only scope_guard() for networking code

> 
> I don't think that needs to be done in this patch, though.

+1

> 
>>   	salt = FIELD_GET(IDPF_VC_XN_SALT_M, msg_info);
>>   	if (xn->salt != salt) {
>>   		dev_err_ratelimited(&adapter->pdev->dev, "Transaction salt does not match (%02x != %02x)\n",
>>   				    xn->salt, salt);
>> +		idpf_vc_xn_unlock(xn);
>>   		return -EINVAL;
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	idpf_vc_xn_lock(xn);
>>   	switch (xn->state) {
>>   	case IDPF_VC_XN_WAITING:
>>   		/* success */