Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1364636 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in fb_is_primary_device()

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in  fb_is_primary_device() Alexander Popov <alpopov@ptsecurity.com> - 2016-03-25 12:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in  fb_is_primary_device() Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2016-03-29 14:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in  fb_is_primary_device() Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2016-03-29 14:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in  fb_is_primary_device() Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-31 15:40 +0200

#1364636 — Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in fb_is_primary_device()

On 09.03.2016 15:46, Alexander Popov wrote:
> On 16.02.2016 18:18, Peter Jones wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 01:49:18PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>> [ Including Peter, the efifb maintainer. Original email is here,
>>>
>>>     http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145552936131335&w=2
>>>
>>>   I've snipped some of the quoted text ]
>>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Feb, at 08:55:22AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (I've Cc:-ed the EFI-FB and FB gents. Mail quoted below.)
>>>>
>>>> * Alexander Popov <alpopov@ptsecurity.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Currently the code in fb_is_primary_device() contains to_pci_dev() macro
>>>>> which is applied to dev from struct fb_info. In some cases this causes
>>>>> bad memory access when fb_is_primary_device() handles fb_info of efifb.
>>>>> The reason is that fb dev of efifb is embedded into struct platform_device
>>>>> but not into struct pci_dev.
>>>>>
>>>>> We can fix this by checking fb dev bus name in fb_is_primary_device().
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that this bug reveals some bigger problem with to_pci_dev(),
>>>>> to_platform_device() and others, which just do container_of() and
>>>>> don't check whether struct device is a part of the appropriate structure.
>>>>> Should we do something more about it?
>>>>>
>>>>> KASan report:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Popov <alpopov@ptsecurity.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  arch/x86/video/fbdev.c | 9 +++++----
>>>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c b/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
>>>>> index d5644bb..4999f78 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
>>>>> @@ -18,11 +18,12 @@ int fb_is_primary_device(struct fb_info *info)
>>>>>  	struct pci_dev *default_device = vga_default_device();
>>>>>  	struct resource *res = NULL;
>>>>>  
>>>>> -	if (device)
>>>>> -		pci_dev = to_pci_dev(device);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -	if (!pci_dev)
>>>>> +	if (!device || !device->bus ||
>>>>> +		    !device->bus->name || strcmp(device->bus->name, "pci")) {
>>>>>  		return 0;
>>>>> +	}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	pci_dev = to_pci_dev(device);
>>>>>  
>>>>>  	if (default_device) {
>>>>>  		if (pci_dev == default_device)
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> 1.9.1
>>>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder if this issue could explain some of the efifb issues we've
>>> seen reported on bugzilla.kernel.org in the past where switching from
>>> efifb to some other framebuffer device caused hangs during boot. I'm
>>> struggling to find the relevant bugzilla entries now, though.
>>
>> It's possible it could, but I don't have them handy either. 

[...]

>> So it's most likely right for efifb to be embedded in a platform_device
>> instead of a pci_dev.  Which leads back to Alexander's question - if it
>> isn't in a pci_dev, that means fb_is_primary_device() needs to not
>> assume it is.  So the patch appears correct, but so is the question -
>> should to_pci_dev() be checking this and returning NULL here?
> 
> The discussion has suspended. May I activate it again?
> 
> So there are two ways to fix the bad memory access in fb_is_primary_device().
> 
> The first one is proposed in my patch. Checking the bus name string doesn't
> look good but I didn't manage to come up with anything better.
> 
> The second way is changing to_pci_dev() similarly. It may return NULL or
> call BUG() when struct device is a part of an inappropriate structure.
> 
> Which way is better? Do we need to do anything with other similar macros?

Excuse me, there is no reply for a long time. Did I touch any taboo topic?
Hope to fix this bug. Thanks.

Best regards,
Alexander

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1366191

On Fri, 25 Mar, at 02:29:21PM, Alexander Popov wrote:
> 
> Excuse me, there is no reply for a long time. Did I touch any taboo topic?
> Hope to fix this bug. Thanks.

Unless anyone complains soonish I'll send this to tip as part of the
EFI urgent queue.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1366205

On Tue, 29 Mar, at 12:53:47PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Mar, at 02:29:21PM, Alexander Popov wrote:
> > 
> > Excuse me, there is no reply for a long time. Did I touch any taboo topic?
> > Hope to fix this bug. Thanks.
> 
> Unless anyone complains soonish I'll send this to tip as part of the
> EFI urgent queue.

Oh, looks like this issue was already fixed here,

  https://lkml.kernel.org/r/tip-743146db071c4a828159211a295d12ff4f61752f@git.kernel.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1368304

* Alexander Popov <alpopov@ptsecurity.com> wrote:

> On 09.03.2016 15:46, Alexander Popov wrote:
> > On 16.02.2016 18:18, Peter Jones wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 01:49:18PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> >>> [ Including Peter, the efifb maintainer. Original email is here,
> >>>
> >>>     http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145552936131335&w=2
> >>>
> >>>   I've snipped some of the quoted text ]
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 16 Feb, at 08:55:22AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> (I've Cc:-ed the EFI-FB and FB gents. Mail quoted below.)
> >>>>
> >>>> * Alexander Popov <alpopov@ptsecurity.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Currently the code in fb_is_primary_device() contains to_pci_dev() macro
> >>>>> which is applied to dev from struct fb_info. In some cases this causes
> >>>>> bad memory access when fb_is_primary_device() handles fb_info of efifb.
> >>>>> The reason is that fb dev of efifb is embedded into struct platform_device
> >>>>> but not into struct pci_dev.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We can fix this by checking fb dev bus name in fb_is_primary_device().
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It seems that this bug reveals some bigger problem with to_pci_dev(),
> >>>>> to_platform_device() and others, which just do container_of() and
> >>>>> don't check whether struct device is a part of the appropriate structure.
> >>>>> Should we do something more about it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> KASan report:
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Popov <alpopov@ptsecurity.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>  arch/x86/video/fbdev.c | 9 +++++----
> >>>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c b/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
> >>>>> index d5644bb..4999f78 100644
> >>>>> --- a/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
> >>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
> >>>>> @@ -18,11 +18,12 @@ int fb_is_primary_device(struct fb_info *info)
> >>>>>  	struct pci_dev *default_device = vga_default_device();
> >>>>>  	struct resource *res = NULL;
> >>>>>  
> >>>>> -	if (device)
> >>>>> -		pci_dev = to_pci_dev(device);
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> -	if (!pci_dev)
> >>>>> +	if (!device || !device->bus ||
> >>>>> +		    !device->bus->name || strcmp(device->bus->name, "pci")) {
> >>>>>  		return 0;
> >>>>> +	}
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +	pci_dev = to_pci_dev(device);
> >>>>>  
> >>>>>  	if (default_device) {
> >>>>>  		if (pci_dev == default_device)
> >>>>> -- 
> >>>>> 1.9.1
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> I wonder if this issue could explain some of the efifb issues we've
> >>> seen reported on bugzilla.kernel.org in the past where switching from
> >>> efifb to some other framebuffer device caused hangs during boot. I'm
> >>> struggling to find the relevant bugzilla entries now, though.
> >>
> >> It's possible it could, but I don't have them handy either. 
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> So it's most likely right for efifb to be embedded in a platform_device
> >> instead of a pci_dev.  Which leads back to Alexander's question - if it
> >> isn't in a pci_dev, that means fb_is_primary_device() needs to not
> >> assume it is.  So the patch appears correct, but so is the question -
> >> should to_pci_dev() be checking this and returning NULL here?
> > 
> > The discussion has suspended. May I activate it again?
> > 
> > So there are two ways to fix the bad memory access in fb_is_primary_device().
> > 
> > The first one is proposed in my patch. Checking the bus name string doesn't
> > look good but I didn't manage to come up with anything better.
> > 
> > The second way is changing to_pci_dev() similarly. It may return NULL or
> > call BUG() when struct device is a part of an inappropriate structure.
> > 
> > Which way is better? Do we need to do anything with other similar macros?
> 
> Excuse me, there is no reply for a long time. Did I touch any taboo topic?
> Hope to fix this bug. Thanks.

No need to worry, it's all upstream already.

Thanks,

	Ingo

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web