From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC594C4320A for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 02:37:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9060D60EC0 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 02:37:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232158AbhHKChp (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2021 22:37:45 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:54072 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231699AbhHKChp (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2021 22:37:45 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21EF260EC0 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 02:37:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1628649442; bh=MHlVCJfEpTNGT+yzyF+RQ8u5NVXIOPzi87+tKm6W6iA=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=OAVjFx91OCFJcmNgdJOp6YzJT9IFPvYAAmttvY7TrRHcEsMBvyb3GNXGKcTbzHc4/ e9BisN7nnu6Po6D1Ocxzm3anfnUARe0WipfZnL1jrKhWmuUNRJHJpjSweN5jrtmJMq AuHkyCTVLD2dWyPQHML82fh0ua7dLdbQ+Ja/pJM1KIzAun4QvHbqPozhhJF95DwffP iCJqphM9Q6Tkf1G8VWvaRbeLR4x+3wjrf8f6rhuWBrtssniJ1osfp8segpvdK77oHa i3S2fdiPFzFj60Hv0nUVY+hh3YfAxo0zTnTF9ek6CfwQHD9W7qTpitIVsKZWjcg282 g+6jD+hbkrzaQ== Received: by mail-lf1-f45.google.com with SMTP id g13so2246261lfj.12 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 19:37:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531L0n4NHBR9iiJBZDI5tXCc13ew/qungqcB4AGNdcN/28a82zCp IrHIWvDeBo/vAKvbFzAAg/Wmu/KKSgdPAMcVfpI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw2vA7JqVfl0uZjLyoxurCd7RC53bidiEj+txGH/1tG2+XLGVDDueUTzDPrAS/5k0eYj7TUPpO3IUSTD5ZtQSQ= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:47e8:: with SMTP id b8mr1163135lfp.555.1628649440441; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 19:37:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210806121521.124365-1-xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com> In-Reply-To: <20210806121521.124365-1-xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com> From: Guo Ren Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 10:37:09 +0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mailbox: fix a UAF bug in msg_submit() To: Xianting Tian Cc: jassisinghbrar@gmail.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 8:15 PM Xianting Tian wrote: > > We met a UAF issue during our mailbox testing. > > In synchronous mailbox, we use mbox_send_message() to send a message > and wait for completion. mbox_send_message() calls msg_submit() to > send the message for the first time, if timeout, it will send the > message in tx_tick() for the second time. Yes, in chan->cl->tx_block will give a second chance to transmit the msg in tx_tick. If chan->mbox->ops->send_data returned error again, then mbox_send_message would return to the user's driver, and the user driver would free the mssg which is still in chan->msg_data & msg_count. Then it caused "Used After Free" problem. The current second chance for chan->cl->tx_block is tricky and it's hard for mailbox driver and user driver implementation in the way. I recommend deleting the second chance mechanism totally to make the code understandable. (If first failed, 2th & 3th & 4th would be still failed.) > > We assume message sending failed for both two times, then the message > will be still in the internal buffer of a chan(chan->msg_data[idx]). > It will be send again in the same way when mbox_send_message() is > called next time. But, at this time this message (chan->msg_data[idx]) > may be a UAF pointer, as the message is passed to mailbox core by user. > User may free it after last calling of mbox_send_message() returned > or not. Who knows!!! > > In this patch, if the first time sending timeout, we pass timeout > info(-ETIME) to msg_submit() when do the second time sending by > tx_tick(). If it still send failed (chan->mbox->ops->send_data() > returned non-zero value) in the second time, we will give up this > message(chan->msg_count--) sending. It doesn't matter, user can chose > to send it again. > > Actually, the issue I described above doesn't exist if > 'chan->mbox->ops->send_data()' always return 0. Because if it always > returns 0, we will always do 'chan->msg_count=E2=80=94' regardless of mes= sage > sending success or failure. We have such mailbox driver, for example, > hi6220_mbox_send_data() always return 0. But we still have mailbox > drivers, which don't always return 0, for example, flexrm_send_data() > of drivers/mailbox/bcm-flexrm-mailbox.c. > > Signed-off-by: Xianting Tian > --- > drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c > index 3e7d4b20a..3e010aafa 100644 > --- a/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c > @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int add_to_rbuf(struct mbox_chan *chan, void *ms= sg) > return idx; > } > > -static void msg_submit(struct mbox_chan *chan) > +static void msg_submit(struct mbox_chan *chan, int last_submit) > { > unsigned count, idx; > unsigned long flags; > @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ static void msg_submit(struct mbox_chan *chan) > chan->cl->tx_prepare(chan->cl, data); > /* Try to submit a message to the MBOX controller */ > err =3D chan->mbox->ops->send_data(chan, data); > - if (!err) { > + if (!err || last_submit =3D=3D -ETIME) { > chan->active_req =3D data; > chan->msg_count--; > } > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static void tx_tick(struct mbox_chan *chan, int r) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->lock, flags); > > /* Submit next message */ > - msg_submit(chan); > + msg_submit(chan, r); > > if (!mssg) > return; > @@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ int mbox_send_message(struct mbox_chan *chan, void *m= ssg) > return t; > } > > - msg_submit(chan); > + msg_submit(chan, 0); > > if (chan->cl->tx_block) { > unsigned long wait; > -- > 2.17.1 > --=20 Best Regards Guo Ren ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/