From: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@omprussia.ru>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
"Sergei Shtylyov" <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-5.10] spi: rpc-if: Fix use-after-free on unbind
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 22:18:12 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <31f68249-2499-7ca6-9804-aad39e94b3b6@omprussia.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201129113548.GA2587@wunner.de>
On 11/29/20 2:35 PM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
>>> rpcif_spi_remove() accesses the driver's private data after calling
>>> spi_unregister_controller() even though that function releases the last
>>> reference on the spi_controller and thereby frees the private data.
>>
>> OK, your analysis seems correct (sorry for the delay admitting this :-).
>
> Thanks! Is it okay to take this for an Acked-by?
Not yet. :-)
>> Not sure why spi_unregister_controller() drops the device reference
>> while spi_register_controller() itself doesn't allocate the memory...
>
> Yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to move away from with
> devm_spi_alloc_master() (introduced in v5.10-rc5 by 5e844cc37a5c).
> The API as it has been so far has made it really easy to shoot oneself
> in the foot.
Maybe it needs to be fixed, rather than using the managed device API?
>>> Fix by switching over to the new devm_spi_alloc_master() helper which
>>> keeps the private data accessible until the driver has unbound.
>>
>> Perhaps the order of the calls in the remove() method could be reversed?
>
> I'm not familiar with power management on these Renesas controllers
> but rpcif_disable_rpm() calls pm_runtime_put_sync(), which I assume
> may put the controller to sleep.
Sigh, that's a stupid typo on my part, being fixed now to pm_runtim_disable()...
> SPI transfers may still be ongoing until spi_unregister_controller()
> returns. Specifically, this function unbinds and unregisters all
> SPI slaves attached to the controller and the slaves' drivers may
> need to perform SPI transfers to quiesce interrupts on the slaves etc.
>
> Thus, the correct order is to call spi_unregister_controller() first
> and only then perform further teardown steps. So the order in
> rpcif_spi_remove() seems correct to me.
OK. :-)
> The only thing that looks confusing is that rpcif_enable_rpm() calls
> pm_runtime_enable(), whereas rpcif_disable_rpm() calls
> pm_runtime_put_sync(). That looks incongruent.
Do you need a link to the fix (it a whole patchset of minor fixes)?
> Thanks,
>
> Lukas
MBR, Sergei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-30 19:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-16 8:23 [PATCH for-5.10] spi: spi-geni-qcom: Fix use-after-free on unbind Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: spi-qcom-qspi: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: spi-sh: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: pxa2xx: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: rpc-if: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-28 20:20 ` Sergey Shtylyov
2020-11-29 11:35 ` Lukas Wunner
2020-11-30 19:18 ` Sergey Shtylyov [this message]
2020-12-02 11:43 ` Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: mxic: Don't leak SPI master in probe error path Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: mt7621: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 11:05 ` Stefan Roese
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: spi-mtk-nor: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-17 4:02 ` Ikjoon Jang
2020-11-17 12:32 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: gpio: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 19:23 ` Andrey Smirnov
2020-11-16 23:03 ` Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 23:59 ` Andrey Smirnov
2020-11-18 1:08 ` Linus Walleij
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: npcm-fiu: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-17 22:38 ` Mark Brown
2020-12-01 13:57 ` Mark Brown
2020-12-01 14:30 ` Lukas Wunner
2020-12-01 17:17 ` Mark Brown
2020-12-01 17:49 ` Lukas Wunner
2020-12-02 15:17 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: rb4xx: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] spi: sc18is602: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-16 8:23 ` [PATCH for-5.10] media: netup_unidvb: " Lukas Wunner
2020-11-23 14:06 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2020-12-01 13:57 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=31f68249-2499-7ca6-9804-aad39e94b3b6@omprussia.ru \
--to=s.shtylyov@omprussia.ru \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).