All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>,
	Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>,
	Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fbdev: efifb: Fix a use-after-free due early fb_info cleanup
Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 09:20:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220507162053.auo2idd5twvnxatj@ldmartin-desk2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220506132225.588379-1-javierm@redhat.com>

On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 03:22:25PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>Commit d258d00fb9c7 ("fbdev: efifb: Cleanup fb_info in .fb_destroy rather
>than .remove") attempted to fix a use-after-free error due driver freeing
>the fb_info in the .remove handler instead of doing it in .fb_destroy.
>
>But ironically that change introduced yet another use-after-free since the
>fb_info was still used after the free.
>
>This should fix for good by freeing the fb_info at the end of the handler.
>
>Fixes: d258d00fb9c7 ("fbdev: efifb: Cleanup fb_info in .fb_destroy rather than .remove")

are these patches going through any CI before being applied? Maybe would
be a good idea to cc intel-gfx mailing list on these fixes to have Intel
CI to pick them up for some tests?

pushed to drm-misc-fixes where the previous patch was applied.

thanks
LUcas De Marchi

>Reported-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>Reported-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>
>Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
>---
>
> drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>index cfa3dc0b4eee..b3d5f884c544 100644
>--- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>+++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>@@ -259,12 +259,12 @@ static void efifb_destroy(struct fb_info *info)
> 			memunmap(info->screen_base);
> 	}
>
>-	framebuffer_release(info);
>-
> 	if (request_mem_succeeded)
> 		release_mem_region(info->apertures->ranges[0].base,
> 				   info->apertures->ranges[0].size);
> 	fb_dealloc_cmap(&info->cmap);
>+
>+	framebuffer_release(info);
> }
>
> static const struct fb_ops efifb_ops = {
>-- 
>2.35.1
>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fbdev: efifb: Fix a use-after-free due early fb_info cleanup
Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 09:20:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220507162053.auo2idd5twvnxatj@ldmartin-desk2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220506132225.588379-1-javierm@redhat.com>

On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 03:22:25PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>Commit d258d00fb9c7 ("fbdev: efifb: Cleanup fb_info in .fb_destroy rather
>than .remove") attempted to fix a use-after-free error due driver freeing
>the fb_info in the .remove handler instead of doing it in .fb_destroy.
>
>But ironically that change introduced yet another use-after-free since the
>fb_info was still used after the free.
>
>This should fix for good by freeing the fb_info at the end of the handler.
>
>Fixes: d258d00fb9c7 ("fbdev: efifb: Cleanup fb_info in .fb_destroy rather than .remove")

are these patches going through any CI before being applied? Maybe would
be a good idea to cc intel-gfx mailing list on these fixes to have Intel
CI to pick them up for some tests?

pushed to drm-misc-fixes where the previous patch was applied.

thanks
LUcas De Marchi

>Reported-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>Reported-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>
>Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
>---
>
> drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>index cfa3dc0b4eee..b3d5f884c544 100644
>--- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>+++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>@@ -259,12 +259,12 @@ static void efifb_destroy(struct fb_info *info)
> 			memunmap(info->screen_base);
> 	}
>
>-	framebuffer_release(info);
>-
> 	if (request_mem_succeeded)
> 		release_mem_region(info->apertures->ranges[0].base,
> 				   info->apertures->ranges[0].size);
> 	fb_dealloc_cmap(&info->cmap);
>+
>+	framebuffer_release(info);
> }
>
> static const struct fb_ops efifb_ops = {
>-- 
>2.35.1
>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] fbdev: efifb: Fix a use-after-free due early fb_info cleanup
Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 09:20:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220507162053.auo2idd5twvnxatj@ldmartin-desk2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220506132225.588379-1-javierm@redhat.com>

On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 03:22:25PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>Commit d258d00fb9c7 ("fbdev: efifb: Cleanup fb_info in .fb_destroy rather
>than .remove") attempted to fix a use-after-free error due driver freeing
>the fb_info in the .remove handler instead of doing it in .fb_destroy.
>
>But ironically that change introduced yet another use-after-free since the
>fb_info was still used after the free.
>
>This should fix for good by freeing the fb_info at the end of the handler.
>
>Fixes: d258d00fb9c7 ("fbdev: efifb: Cleanup fb_info in .fb_destroy rather than .remove")

are these patches going through any CI before being applied? Maybe would
be a good idea to cc intel-gfx mailing list on these fixes to have Intel
CI to pick them up for some tests?

pushed to drm-misc-fixes where the previous patch was applied.

thanks
LUcas De Marchi

>Reported-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>Reported-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>
>Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
>---
>
> drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>index cfa3dc0b4eee..b3d5f884c544 100644
>--- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>+++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
>@@ -259,12 +259,12 @@ static void efifb_destroy(struct fb_info *info)
> 			memunmap(info->screen_base);
> 	}
>
>-	framebuffer_release(info);
>-
> 	if (request_mem_succeeded)
> 		release_mem_region(info->apertures->ranges[0].base,
> 				   info->apertures->ranges[0].size);
> 	fb_dealloc_cmap(&info->cmap);
>+
>+	framebuffer_release(info);
> }
>
> static const struct fb_ops efifb_ops = {
>-- 
>2.35.1
>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-05-07 16:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-06 13:22 [PATCH] fbdev: efifb: Fix a use-after-free due early fb_info cleanup Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-06 13:22 ` [Intel-gfx] " Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-06 13:22 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-06 13:39 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-05-06 13:39   ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-05-06 13:39   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-05-06 14:56 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
2022-05-06 15:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Andi Shyti
2022-05-06 15:44   ` Andi Shyti
2022-05-06 16:50 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-05-06 16:50   ` [Intel-gfx] " Andrzej Hajda
2022-05-06 16:50   ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-05-07 16:20 ` Lucas De Marchi [this message]
2022-05-07 16:20   ` [Intel-gfx] " Lucas De Marchi
2022-05-07 16:20   ` Lucas De Marchi
2022-05-07 16:40   ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-07 16:40     ` [Intel-gfx] " Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-07 16:40     ` Javier Martinez Canillas

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=20220507162053.auo2idd5twvnxatj@ldmartin-desk2 \
    --to=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=andrzej.hajda@intel.com \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=deller@gmx.de \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=javierm@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pjones@redhat.com \
    --cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.