From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754514AbdLGNBJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 08:01:09 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:32918 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753815AbdLGNBE (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 08:01:04 -0500 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Iago Abal , Marek Szyprowski , Vinod Koul , Sasha Levin Subject: [PATCH 4.9 073/109] dmaengine: pl330: fix double lock Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 13:56:57 +0100 Message-Id: <20171207125643.112475885@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.15.1 In-Reply-To: <20171207125634.631485452@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20171207125634.631485452@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.65 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Iago Abal [ Upstream commit 91539eb1fda2d530d3b268eef542c5414e54bf1a ] The static bug finder EBA (http://www.iagoabal.eu/eba/) reported the following double-lock bug: Double lock: 1. spin_lock_irqsave(pch->lock, flags) at pl330_free_chan_resources:2236; 2. call to function `pl330_release_channel' immediately after; 3. call to function `dma_pl330_rqcb' in line 1753; 4. spin_lock_irqsave(pch->lock, flags) at dma_pl330_rqcb:1505. I have fixed it as suggested by Marek Szyprowski. First, I have replaced `pch->lock' with `pl330->lock' in functions `pl330_alloc_chan_resources' and `pl330_free_chan_resources'. This avoids the double-lock by acquiring a different lock than `dma_pl330_rqcb'. NOTE that, as a result, `pl330_free_chan_resources' executes `list_splice_tail_init' on `pch->work_list' under lock `pl330->lock', whereas in the rest of the code `pch->work_list' is protected by `pch->lock'. I don't know if this may cause race conditions. Similarly `pch->cyclic' is written by `pl330_alloc_chan_resources' under `pl330->lock' but read by `pl330_tx_submit' under `pch->lock'. Second, I have removed locking from `pl330_request_channel' and `pl330_release_channel' functions. Function `pl330_request_channel' is only called from `pl330_alloc_chan_resources', so the lock is already held. Function `pl330_release_channel' is called from `pl330_free_chan_resources', which already holds the lock, and from `pl330_del'. Function `pl330_del' is called in an error path of `pl330_probe' and at the end of `pl330_remove', but I assume that there cannot be concurrent accesses to the protected data at those points. Signed-off-by: Iago Abal Reviewed-by: Marek Szyprowski Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- drivers/dma/pl330.c | 19 ++++++------------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) --- a/drivers/dma/pl330.c +++ b/drivers/dma/pl330.c @@ -1694,7 +1694,6 @@ static bool _chan_ns(const struct pl330_ static struct pl330_thread *pl330_request_channel(struct pl330_dmac *pl330) { struct pl330_thread *thrd = NULL; - unsigned long flags; int chans, i; if (pl330->state == DYING) @@ -1702,8 +1701,6 @@ static struct pl330_thread *pl330_reques chans = pl330->pcfg.num_chan; - spin_lock_irqsave(&pl330->lock, flags); - for (i = 0; i < chans; i++) { thrd = &pl330->channels[i]; if ((thrd->free) && (!_manager_ns(thrd) || @@ -1721,8 +1718,6 @@ static struct pl330_thread *pl330_reques thrd = NULL; } - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pl330->lock, flags); - return thrd; } @@ -1740,7 +1735,6 @@ static inline void _free_event(struct pl static void pl330_release_channel(struct pl330_thread *thrd) { struct pl330_dmac *pl330; - unsigned long flags; if (!thrd || thrd->free) return; @@ -1752,10 +1746,8 @@ static void pl330_release_channel(struct pl330 = thrd->dmac; - spin_lock_irqsave(&pl330->lock, flags); _free_event(thrd, thrd->ev); thrd->free = true; - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pl330->lock, flags); } /* Initialize the structure for PL330 configuration, that can be used @@ -2120,20 +2112,20 @@ static int pl330_alloc_chan_resources(st struct pl330_dmac *pl330 = pch->dmac; unsigned long flags; - spin_lock_irqsave(&pch->lock, flags); + spin_lock_irqsave(&pl330->lock, flags); dma_cookie_init(chan); pch->cyclic = false; pch->thread = pl330_request_channel(pl330); if (!pch->thread) { - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pch->lock, flags); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pl330->lock, flags); return -ENOMEM; } tasklet_init(&pch->task, pl330_tasklet, (unsigned long) pch); - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pch->lock, flags); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pl330->lock, flags); return 1; } @@ -2236,12 +2228,13 @@ static int pl330_pause(struct dma_chan * static void pl330_free_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *chan) { struct dma_pl330_chan *pch = to_pchan(chan); + struct pl330_dmac *pl330 = pch->dmac; unsigned long flags; tasklet_kill(&pch->task); pm_runtime_get_sync(pch->dmac->ddma.dev); - spin_lock_irqsave(&pch->lock, flags); + spin_lock_irqsave(&pl330->lock, flags); pl330_release_channel(pch->thread); pch->thread = NULL; @@ -2249,7 +2242,7 @@ static void pl330_free_chan_resources(st if (pch->cyclic) list_splice_tail_init(&pch->work_list, &pch->dmac->desc_pool); - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pch->lock, flags); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pl330->lock, flags); pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(pch->dmac->ddma.dev); pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(pch->dmac->ddma.dev); }