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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1660253 > unrolled thread

Re: usb/gadget: another GPF in usb_gadget_unregister_driver

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: usb/gadget: another GPF in usb_gadget_unregister_driver Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2017-06-07 23:30 +0200
    Re: usb/gadget: another GPF in usb_gadget_unregister_driver Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> - 2017-06-08 13:50 +0200
      Re: usb/gadget: another GPF in usb_gadget_unregister_driver Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2017-06-08 18:00 +0200
        Re: usb/gadget: another GPF in usb_gadget_unregister_driver Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> - 2017-06-08 18:40 +0200

#1660253 — Re: usb/gadget: another GPF in usb_gadget_unregister_driver

On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've got the following error report while fuzzing the kernel with syzkaller.
> >>
> >> On commit b29794ec95c6856b316c2295904208bf11ffddd9 (4.12-rc4+).
> >>
> >> This looks quite similar to
> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/syzkaller/HDawLBeeORI
> >
> > It does look very similar, but that problem was supposed to have been
> > fixed by commit 7b0173811260 ("usb: gadget: udc: core: fix return code
> > of usb_gadget_probe_driver()").
> >
> >> I'm able to reproduce this, so I can collect some debug traces if needed.
> >
> > Can you provide an strace or the equivalent?
> 
> Here's the syzkaller program (which is actually two programs executed
> consequently):
> https://gist.github.com/xairy/fe0a7531e00df5e8bc23e2e56e413510
> 
> Here's the strace log:
> https://gist.github.com/xairy/5fadc3b5d8b2b80c97e566538de08bc4

Do you know which of the two programs got the GPF?  I can't tell from 
the strace log.

> Unfortunately there's a lot of unrelated garbage, but I can't extract
> a simple C reproducer.

That's okay, it's easy enough to see what's going on.  One program 
opens /dev/gadget/dummy_udc, writes an invalid setup string, then 
writes a valid setup string, and then exits.  The other program just 
opens the file and then exits.

> I can also apply patches with debug printk's, run the reproducer and
> send you the result if that will help.

Maybe you can patch usb_gadget_probe_driver() in 
drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c.  Find out whether the "if 
(!driver->match_existing_only)" test is executed and whether it 
succeeds, and find out whether the code following "found:" is executed.
I would expect that the test is not executed and the jump to "found:" 
is taken, so udc_bind_to_driver() is called and returns 0.  Thus, 
udc->driver should be set to driver.

Also, in usb_gadget_unregister_driver(), in the list_for_each_entry() 
loop, we should have udc->driver == driver and therefore ret should get 
set to 0.  Consequently, the list_del() near the end should not be 
executed and so the GPF should not occur.

In particular, do these subroutines get called more than once?

Alan Stern

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1661079

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I've got the following error report while fuzzing the kernel with syzkaller.
>> >>
>> >> On commit b29794ec95c6856b316c2295904208bf11ffddd9 (4.12-rc4+).
>> >>
>> >> This looks quite similar to
>> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/syzkaller/HDawLBeeORI
>> >
>> > It does look very similar, but that problem was supposed to have been
>> > fixed by commit 7b0173811260 ("usb: gadget: udc: core: fix return code
>> > of usb_gadget_probe_driver()").
>> >
>> >> I'm able to reproduce this, so I can collect some debug traces if needed.
>> >
>> > Can you provide an strace or the equivalent?
>>
>> Here's the syzkaller program (which is actually two programs executed
>> consequently):
>> https://gist.github.com/xairy/fe0a7531e00df5e8bc23e2e56e413510
>>
>> Here's the strace log:
>> https://gist.github.com/xairy/5fadc3b5d8b2b80c97e566538de08bc4
>
> Do you know which of the two programs got the GPF?  I can't tell from
> the strace log.
>
>> Unfortunately there's a lot of unrelated garbage, but I can't extract
>> a simple C reproducer.
>
> That's okay, it's easy enough to see what's going on.  One program
> opens /dev/gadget/dummy_udc, writes an invalid setup string, then
> writes a valid setup string, and then exits.  The other program just
> opens the file and then exits.
>
>> I can also apply patches with debug printk's, run the reproducer and
>> send you the result if that will help.

I've extract another crash log, which is a little simpler:
https://gist.github.com/xairy/b8c814cbd731e4632e8e8fa0f51a29e8

>
> Maybe you can patch usb_gadget_probe_driver() in
> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c.  Find out whether the "if
> (!driver->match_existing_only)" test is executed and whether it
> succeeds, and find out whether the code following "found:" is executed.
> I would expect that the test is not executed and the jump to "found:"
> is taken, so udc_bind_to_driver() is called and returns 0.  Thus,
> udc->driver should be set to driver.

Here's the funcgraph for usb_gadget_probe_driver:
https://gist.github.com/xairy/3221e2cb9c59514880d24c955de30b80

The (!driver->match_existing_only) test is not executed.
The code following "found:" is executed.

>
> Also, in usb_gadget_unregister_driver(), in the list_for_each_entry()
> loop, we should have udc->driver == driver and therefore ret should get
> set to 0.  Consequently, the list_del() near the end should not be
> executed and so the GPF should not occur.

Here's the funcgraph for usb_gadget_unregister_driver:
https://gist.github.com/xairy/887c52a12af8c9f9fe8ba3e4fa0ef1f0

What you described happens during the first call of
usb_gadget_unregister_driver(), however there's another one after
that, which is probably triggered by the second program.

>
> In particular, do these subroutines get called more than once?

usb_gadget_unregister_driver() is called twice, the GPF happens during
the second call.

>
> Alan Stern
>

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

#1661415

On Thu, 8 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> I've got the following error report while fuzzing the kernel with syzkaller.
> >> >>
> >> >> On commit b29794ec95c6856b316c2295904208bf11ffddd9 (4.12-rc4+).
> >> >>
> >> >> This looks quite similar to
> >> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/syzkaller/HDawLBeeORI
> >> >
> >> > It does look very similar, but that problem was supposed to have been
> >> > fixed by commit 7b0173811260 ("usb: gadget: udc: core: fix return code
> >> > of usb_gadget_probe_driver()").
> >> >
> >> >> I'm able to reproduce this, so I can collect some debug traces if needed.
> >> >
> >> > Can you provide an strace or the equivalent?
> >>
> >> Here's the syzkaller program (which is actually two programs executed
> >> consequently):
> >> https://gist.github.com/xairy/fe0a7531e00df5e8bc23e2e56e413510
> >>
> >> Here's the strace log:
> >> https://gist.github.com/xairy/5fadc3b5d8b2b80c97e566538de08bc4
> >
> > Do you know which of the two programs got the GPF?  I can't tell from
> > the strace log.
> >
> >> Unfortunately there's a lot of unrelated garbage, but I can't extract
> >> a simple C reproducer.
> >
> > That's okay, it's easy enough to see what's going on.  One program
> > opens /dev/gadget/dummy_udc, writes an invalid setup string, then
> > writes a valid setup string, and then exits.  The other program just
> > opens the file and then exits.
> >
> >> I can also apply patches with debug printk's, run the reproducer and
> >> send you the result if that will help.
> 
> I've extract another crash log, which is a little simpler:
> https://gist.github.com/xairy/b8c814cbd731e4632e8e8fa0f51a29e8
> 
> >
> > Maybe you can patch usb_gadget_probe_driver() in
> > drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c.  Find out whether the "if
> > (!driver->match_existing_only)" test is executed and whether it
> > succeeds, and find out whether the code following "found:" is executed.
> > I would expect that the test is not executed and the jump to "found:"
> > is taken, so udc_bind_to_driver() is called and returns 0.  Thus,
> > udc->driver should be set to driver.
> 
> Here's the funcgraph for usb_gadget_probe_driver:
> https://gist.github.com/xairy/3221e2cb9c59514880d24c955de30b80
> 
> The (!driver->match_existing_only) test is not executed.
> The code following "found:" is executed.
> 
> >
> > Also, in usb_gadget_unregister_driver(), in the list_for_each_entry()
> > loop, we should have udc->driver == driver and therefore ret should get
> > set to 0.  Consequently, the list_del() near the end should not be
> > executed and so the GPF should not occur.
> 
> Here's the funcgraph for usb_gadget_unregister_driver:
> https://gist.github.com/xairy/887c52a12af8c9f9fe8ba3e4fa0ef1f0
> 
> What you described happens during the first call of
> usb_gadget_unregister_driver(), however there's another one after
> that, which is probably triggered by the second program.
> 
> >
> > In particular, do these subroutines get called more than once?
> 
> usb_gadget_unregister_driver() is called twice, the GPF happens during
> the second call.

Good, that's definitive.  And I feel stupid for missing this bug.  
The patch is below.

Alan Stern



Index: usb-4.x/drivers/usb/gadget/legacy/inode.c
===================================================================
--- usb-4.x.orig/drivers/usb/gadget/legacy/inode.c
+++ usb-4.x/drivers/usb/gadget/legacy/inode.c
@@ -1183,8 +1183,10 @@ dev_release (struct inode *inode, struct
 
 	/* closing ep0 === shutdown all */
 
-	if (dev->gadget_registered)
+	if (dev->gadget_registered) {
 		usb_gadget_unregister_driver (&gadgetfs_driver);
+		dev->gadget_registered = false;
+	}
 
 	/* at this point "good" hardware has disconnected the
 	 * device from USB; the host won't see it any more.

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

#1661469

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I've got the following error report while fuzzing the kernel with syzkaller.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On commit b29794ec95c6856b316c2295904208bf11ffddd9 (4.12-rc4+).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This looks quite similar to
>> >> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/syzkaller/HDawLBeeORI
>> >> >
>> >> > It does look very similar, but that problem was supposed to have been
>> >> > fixed by commit 7b0173811260 ("usb: gadget: udc: core: fix return code
>> >> > of usb_gadget_probe_driver()").
>> >> >
>> >> >> I'm able to reproduce this, so I can collect some debug traces if needed.
>> >> >
>> >> > Can you provide an strace or the equivalent?
>> >>
>> >> Here's the syzkaller program (which is actually two programs executed
>> >> consequently):
>> >> https://gist.github.com/xairy/fe0a7531e00df5e8bc23e2e56e413510
>> >>
>> >> Here's the strace log:
>> >> https://gist.github.com/xairy/5fadc3b5d8b2b80c97e566538de08bc4
>> >
>> > Do you know which of the two programs got the GPF?  I can't tell from
>> > the strace log.
>> >
>> >> Unfortunately there's a lot of unrelated garbage, but I can't extract
>> >> a simple C reproducer.
>> >
>> > That's okay, it's easy enough to see what's going on.  One program
>> > opens /dev/gadget/dummy_udc, writes an invalid setup string, then
>> > writes a valid setup string, and then exits.  The other program just
>> > opens the file and then exits.
>> >
>> >> I can also apply patches with debug printk's, run the reproducer and
>> >> send you the result if that will help.
>>
>> I've extract another crash log, which is a little simpler:
>> https://gist.github.com/xairy/b8c814cbd731e4632e8e8fa0f51a29e8
>>
>> >
>> > Maybe you can patch usb_gadget_probe_driver() in
>> > drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c.  Find out whether the "if
>> > (!driver->match_existing_only)" test is executed and whether it
>> > succeeds, and find out whether the code following "found:" is executed.
>> > I would expect that the test is not executed and the jump to "found:"
>> > is taken, so udc_bind_to_driver() is called and returns 0.  Thus,
>> > udc->driver should be set to driver.
>>
>> Here's the funcgraph for usb_gadget_probe_driver:
>> https://gist.github.com/xairy/3221e2cb9c59514880d24c955de30b80
>>
>> The (!driver->match_existing_only) test is not executed.
>> The code following "found:" is executed.
>>
>> >
>> > Also, in usb_gadget_unregister_driver(), in the list_for_each_entry()
>> > loop, we should have udc->driver == driver and therefore ret should get
>> > set to 0.  Consequently, the list_del() near the end should not be
>> > executed and so the GPF should not occur.
>>
>> Here's the funcgraph for usb_gadget_unregister_driver:
>> https://gist.github.com/xairy/887c52a12af8c9f9fe8ba3e4fa0ef1f0
>>
>> What you described happens during the first call of
>> usb_gadget_unregister_driver(), however there's another one after
>> that, which is probably triggered by the second program.
>>
>> >
>> > In particular, do these subroutines get called more than once?
>>
>> usb_gadget_unregister_driver() is called twice, the GPF happens during
>> the second call.
>
> Good, that's definitive.  And I feel stupid for missing this bug.
> The patch is below.

Perfect, this fixes the issue, thanks!

>
> Alan Stern
>
>
>
> Index: usb-4.x/drivers/usb/gadget/legacy/inode.c
> ===================================================================
> --- usb-4.x.orig/drivers/usb/gadget/legacy/inode.c
> +++ usb-4.x/drivers/usb/gadget/legacy/inode.c
> @@ -1183,8 +1183,10 @@ dev_release (struct inode *inode, struct
>
>         /* closing ep0 === shutdown all */
>
> -       if (dev->gadget_registered)
> +       if (dev->gadget_registered) {
>                 usb_gadget_unregister_driver (&gadgetfs_driver);
> +               dev->gadget_registered = false;
> +       }
>
>         /* at this point "good" hardware has disconnected the
>          * device from USB; the host won't see it any more.
>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web