From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756827AbdCHEOR (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Mar 2017 23:14:17 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:53959 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756765AbdCHEON (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Mar 2017 23:14:13 -0500 Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] vTPM: Fix missing NULL check From: "Hon Ching(Vicky) Lo" To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Ashley Lai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Peter Huewe In-Reply-To: <20170306231946.GA23953@obsidianresearch.com> References: <1488839535-11822-1-git-send-email-honclo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170306231946.GA23953@obsidianresearch.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 23:12:43 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 (2.32.3-34.el6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable x-cbid: 17030804-0016-0000-0000-000002230AB1 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17030804-0017-0000-0000-000006909E37 Message-Id: <1488946363.15595.17.camel@vtpm2014.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-03-08_01:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=2 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1703080034 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2017-03-06 at 16:19 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 05:32:15PM -0500, Hon Ching(Vicky) Lo wrote: > > The current code passes the address of tpm_chip as the argument to > > dev_get_drvdata() without prior NULL check in > > tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma. This resulted an oops during kernel > > boot when vTPM is enabled in Power partition configured in active > > memory sharing mode. > > > > The vio_driver's get_desired_dma() is called before the probe(), which > > for vtpm is tpm_ibmvtpm_probe, and it's this latter function that > > initializes the driver and set data. Attempting to get data before > > the probe() caused the problem. > > > > This patch adds a NULL check to the tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma. > > Does this also need a hunk in tpm_ibmvtpm_remove to null the drvdata > after removal, or does something in the driver code guarentee it is > null'd after remove? The driver does not ganrantee it is null'd after remove. > > We don't want to use-after-free chip on the next probe cycle. > > > static unsigned long tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma(struct vio_dev *vdev) > > { > > struct tpm_chip *chip = dev_get_drvdata(&vdev->dev); > > - struct ibmvtpm_dev *ibmvtpm = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev); > > + struct ibmvtpm_dev *ibmvtpm = NULL; > > + > > + if (chip) > > + ibmvtpm = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev); > > Maybe just do this, clearer that it is chip that can be null. We do > not want to see drivers testing their chip drvdata against null. > That should do it. > Also, how does locking work here? Does the vio core prevent > tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma and tpm_ibmvtpm_remove from running > concurrently? No, vio core doesn't prevent tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma and tpm_ibmvtpm_remove from running concurrently. vio_bus_probe calls vio_cmo_bus_probe which calls tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma. tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma is called before the code enters critical section. There is no locking mechanism around tpm_ibmvtpm_remove in vio_bus_remove. What's the concern here? > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c > index 946025a7413b6b..ced6b9f0008dc2 100644 > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c > @@ -294,6 +294,8 @@ static int tpm_ibmvtpm_remove(struct vio_dev *vdev) > kfree(ibmvtpm->rtce_buf); > } > > + /* For tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma */ > + dev_set_drvdata(&vdev->dev, NULL); > kfree(ibmvtpm); > > return 0; > @@ -309,15 +311,16 @@ static int tpm_ibmvtpm_remove(struct vio_dev *vdev) > static unsigned long tpm_ibmvtpm_get_desired_dma(struct vio_dev *vdev) > { > struct tpm_chip *chip = dev_get_drvdata(&vdev->dev); > - struct ibmvtpm_dev *ibmvtpm = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev); > + struct ibmvtpm_dev *ibmvtpm; > > /* ibmvtpm initializes at probe time, so the data we are > * asking for may not be set yet. Estimate that 4K required > * for TCE-mapped buffer in addition to CRQ. > */ > - if (!ibmvtpm) > + if (!chip) > return CRQ_RES_BUF_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE; > > + ibmvtpm = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev); > return CRQ_RES_BUF_SIZE + ibmvtpm->rtce_size; > } > > Thanks, Vicky