Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix comment #6

Open
planetA opened this issue Mar 24, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Fix comment #6

planetA opened this issue Mar 24, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@planetA
Copy link
Owner

planetA commented Mar 24, 2021

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/d652ea30ba32db12fe8365182fad5ba2e7c22822/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c#L1202

planetA pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 10, 2023
In Google internal bug 265639009 we've received an (as yet) unreproducible
crash report from an aarch64 GKI 5.10.149-android13 running device.

AFAICT the source code is at:
  https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/+/refs/tags/ASB-2022-12-05_13-5.10

The call stack is:
  ncm_close() -> ncm_notify() -> ncm_do_notify()
with the crash at:
  ncm_do_notify+0x98/0x270
Code: 79000d0b b9000a6c f940012a f9400269 (b9405d4b)

Which I believe disassembles to (I don't know ARM assembly, but it looks sane enough to me...):

  // halfword (16-bit) store presumably to event->wLength (at offset 6 of struct usb_cdc_notification)
  0B 0D 00 79    strh w11, [x8, #6]

  // word (32-bit) store presumably to req->Length (at offset 8 of struct usb_request)
  6C 0A 00 B9    str  w12, [x19, torvalds#8]

  // x10 (NULL) was read here from offset 0 of valid pointer x9
  // IMHO we're reading 'cdev->gadget' and getting NULL
  // gadget is indeed at offset 0 of struct usb_composite_dev
  2A 01 40 F9    ldr  x10, [x9]

  // loading req->buf pointer, which is at offset 0 of struct usb_request
  69 02 40 F9    ldr  x9, [x19]

  // x10 is null, crash, appears to be attempt to read cdev->gadget->max_speed
  4B 5D 40 B9    ldr  w11, [x10, #0x5c]

which seems to line up with ncm_do_notify() case NCM_NOTIFY_SPEED code fragment:

  event->wLength = cpu_to_le16(8);
  req->length = NCM_STATUS_BYTECOUNT;

  /* SPEED_CHANGE data is up/down speeds in bits/sec */
  data = req->buf + sizeof *event;
  data[0] = cpu_to_le32(ncm_bitrate(cdev->gadget));

My analysis of registers and NULL ptr deref crash offset
  (Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 000000000000005c)
heavily suggests that the crash is due to 'cdev->gadget' being NULL when executing:
  data[0] = cpu_to_le32(ncm_bitrate(cdev->gadget));
which calls:
  ncm_bitrate(NULL)
which then calls:
  gadget_is_superspeed(NULL)
which reads
  ((struct usb_gadget *)NULL)->max_speed
and hits a panic.

AFAICT, if I'm counting right, the offset of max_speed is indeed 0x5C.
(remember there's a GKI KABI reservation of 16 bytes in struct work_struct)

It's not at all clear to me how this is all supposed to work...
but returning 0 seems much better than panic-ing...

Cc: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
Cc: Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]>
Cc: Carlos Llamas <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Maciej Żenczykowski <[email protected]>
Cc: stable <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
planetA pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 10, 2023
During EEH error injection testing, a deadlock was encountered in the tg3
driver when tg3_io_error_detected() was attempting to cancel outstanding
reset tasks:

crash> foreach UN bt
...
PID: 159    TASK: c0000000067c6000  CPU: 8   COMMAND: "eehd"
...
 #5 [c00000000681f990] __cancel_work_timer at c00000000019fd18
 #6 [c00000000681fa30] tg3_io_error_detected at c00800000295f098 [tg3]
 #7 [c00000000681faf0] eeh_report_error at c00000000004e25c
...

PID: 290    TASK: c000000036e5f800  CPU: 6   COMMAND: "kworker/6:1"
...
 #4 [c00000003721fbc0] rtnl_lock at c000000000c940d8
 #5 [c00000003721fbe0] tg3_reset_task at c008000002969358 [tg3]
 #6 [c00000003721fc60] process_one_work at c00000000019e5c4
...

PID: 296    TASK: c000000037a65800  CPU: 21  COMMAND: "kworker/21:1"
...
 #4 [c000000037247bc0] rtnl_lock at c000000000c940d8
 #5 [c000000037247be0] tg3_reset_task at c008000002969358 [tg3]
 #6 [c000000037247c60] process_one_work at c00000000019e5c4
...

PID: 655    TASK: c000000036f49000  CPU: 16  COMMAND: "kworker/16:2"
...:1

 #4 [c0000000373ebbc0] rtnl_lock at c000000000c940d8
 #5 [c0000000373ebbe0] tg3_reset_task at c008000002969358 [tg3]
 #6 [c0000000373ebc60] process_one_work at c00000000019e5c4
...

Code inspection shows that both tg3_io_error_detected() and
tg3_reset_task() attempt to acquire the RTNL lock at the beginning of
their code blocks.  If tg3_reset_task() should happen to execute between
the times when tg3_io_error_deteced() acquires the RTNL lock and
tg3_reset_task_cancel() is called, a deadlock will occur.

Moving tg3_reset_task_cancel() call earlier within the code block, prior
to acquiring RTNL, prevents this from happening, but also exposes another
deadlock issue where tg3_reset_task() may execute AFTER
tg3_io_error_detected() has executed:

crash> foreach UN bt
PID: 159    TASK: c0000000067d2000  CPU: 9   COMMAND: "eehd"
...
 #4 [c000000006867a60] rtnl_lock at c000000000c940d8
 #5 [c000000006867a80] tg3_io_slot_reset at c0080000026c2ea8 [tg3]
 #6 [c000000006867b00] eeh_report_reset at c00000000004de88
...
PID: 363    TASK: c000000037564000  CPU: 6   COMMAND: "kworker/6:1"
...
 #3 [c000000036c1bb70] msleep at c000000000259e6c
 #4 [c000000036c1bba0] napi_disable at c000000000c6b848
 #5 [c000000036c1bbe0] tg3_reset_task at c0080000026d942c [tg3]
 #6 [c000000036c1bc60] process_one_work at c00000000019e5c4
...

This issue can be avoided by aborting tg3_reset_task() if EEH error
recovery is already in progress.

Fixes: db84bf4 ("tg3: tg3_reset_task() needs to use rtnl_lock to synchronize")
Signed-off-by: David Christensen <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Pavan Chebbi <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant