All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kwilczynski@kernel.org>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI/proc: Fix race between pci_proc_init() and pci_bus_add_device()
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2026 05:19:37 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260606201458.GA1442288@rocinante> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260606172056.DADBA1F00893@smtp.kernel.org>

Hello,

> > +	bus->procdir = proc_mkdir(name, proc_bus_pci_dir);
> > +	if (!bus->procdir)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> 
> [Severity: High]
> Can this direct assignment overwrite a valid pointer with NULL if a concurrent
> creation fails?
> 
> If an asynchronous probe runs concurrently without holding
> pci_rescan_remove_lock(), two threads might both observe bus->procdir as
> NULL. If one successfully creates the entry, the second could fail due to a
> name collision and return NULL, unconditionally overwriting the valid
> bus->procdir.
> 
> Could this cause subsequent child devices to erroneously create their proc
> files in the root of /proc?

[...]
> >  	sprintf(name, "%02x.%x", PCI_SLOT(dev->devfn), PCI_FUNC(dev->devfn));
> > -	e = proc_create_data(name, S_IFREG | S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR, bus->procdir,
> > -			     &proc_bus_pci_ops, dev);
> > -	if (!e)
> > +	dev->procent = proc_create_data(name, S_IFREG | S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
> > +					dev->bus->procdir, &proc_bus_pci_ops,
> > +					dev);
> > +	if (!dev->procent)
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> 
> [Severity: High]
> Does this assignment introduce a risk of a use-after-free and resource leak?
> 
> Similar to the bus directory, if concurrent threads call
> pci_proc_attach_device() for the same device, one might overwrite a
> valid dev->procent with NULL when proc_create_data() fails.
> 
> Later, pci_proc_detach_device() would call proc_remove(NULL) which does
> nothing. The procfs file would be leaked, and because the file's data points
> to the freed pci_dev struct, subsequent reads from userspace could trigger a
> use-after-free.

I will send another revision to address this feedback.

Thank you!

	Krzysztof

      reply	other threads:[~2026-06-06 20:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-06 17:01 [PATCH v2] PCI/proc: Fix race between pci_proc_init() and pci_bus_add_device() Krzysztof Wilczyński
2026-06-06 17:20 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-06 20:19   ` Krzysztof Wilczyński [this message]

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=20260606201458.GA1442288@rocinante \
    --to=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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.