All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Chandrakanth Patil" <chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 18:13:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260818181328.867D91F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260818231426.58105-9-chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:

New issues:
- [High] Placement of the newly added bounds check introduces a delayed command queue stall and async chain breakage.

Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] Concurrent lockless modification of delayed lists from process and IRQ contexts.
- [High] TOCTOU race window during delayed command hardware dispatch allows double-free.
--

--- Patch [8]: [PATCH 08/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal ---
commit 498a49c2b9e406ac25107bbe9cd216b5c786f292
Author: Chandrakanth Patil <chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>

mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal

Device handles reported by the controller are used to index the remove
pending bitmap and to build a task management request without being
compared against the maximum handle the controller reported.

Check the handle before using it.

> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c b/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> index f80a21ec161b6..7ae4b4fad3f4a 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> @@ -2401,7 +2401,8 @@ static void mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou(struct mpi3mr_ioc *mrioc,
>  		ioc_info(mrioc,
>  		    "%s :dev removal handshake completed successfully: handle(0x%04x)\n",
>  		    __func__, drv_cmd->dev_handle);
> -		clear_bit(drv_cmd->dev_handle, mrioc->removepend_bitmap);
> +		if (drv_cmd->dev_handle < mrioc->facts.max_devhandle)
> +			clear_bit(drv_cmd->dev_handle, mrioc->removepend_bitmap);
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!list_empty(&mrioc->delayed_rmhs_list)) {

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but is there a race window here if the
hardware request completes extremely quickly?

mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm() sends the request to hardware. Only after it
returns does the code list_del() and kfree() the delayed_dev_rmhs node:

mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou()
{
        ...
        mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm(mrioc, drv_cmd->dev_handle, drv_cmd,
            drv_cmd->iou_rc);
        list_del(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list);
        kfree(delayed_dev_rmhs);
        return;
}

If the completion executes concurrently and triggers another call to
mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou(), could it dequeue and dispatch the exact
same node before the first thread has a chance to remove it, leading to
a double-free?

Similar patterns seem to exist in mpi3mr_complete_evt_ack().

[Severity: Critical]
This is also a pre-existing issue, but I noticed there might be unprotected
list operations on delayed_rmhs_list.

The delayed_rmhs_list is appended to in mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm():

        list_add_tail(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list,
            &mrioc->delayed_rmhs_list);

And it is removed from in mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou():

        list_del(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list);

Are these list operations safe from concurrent modifications between process
and IRQ contexts, or should they be protected by a spinlock to prevent
list corruption? Similar patterns exist for delayed_evtack_cmds_list.

[ ... ]

> @@ -2564,6 +2565,12 @@ static void mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm(struct mpi3mr_ioc *mrioc, u16 handle,
>  	drv_cmd->callback = mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_tm;
>  	drv_cmd->dev_handle = handle;
>  	drv_cmd->iou_rc = iou_rc;
> +	if (handle >= mrioc->facts.max_devhandle) {
> +		ioc_err(mrioc, "dev_remove_hs: handle(0x%04x) >= max_devhandle(0x%04x)\n",
> +			handle, mrioc->facts.max_devhandle);
> +		goto out_failed;
> +	}
> +

[Severity: High]
If handle >= mrioc->facts.max_devhandle, the code goes to out_failed.
This frees the command slot synchronously but does not invoke the
completion callback.

If this was called from mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou() to process a delayed
command, would this synchronous failure prevent any subsequent delayed
items from being processed since the completion chain is broken?

Also, because this check is placed here, out-of-bounds handles can still be
appended to the delayed_rmhs_list earlier in this function when command
slots are full:

mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm()
{
        ...
        if (cmd_idx >= MPI3MR_NUM_DEVRMCMD) {
                delayed_dev_rmhs = kzalloc_obj(*delayed_dev_rmhs, GFP_ATOMIC);
                ...
                delayed_dev_rmhs->handle = handle;
                list_add_tail(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list, ...);
                return;
        }
        ...
}

Should the bounds check happen before allocating and adding to the delayed
list?

>  	tm_req.dev_handle = cpu_to_le16(handle);
>  	tm_req.task_type = MPI3_SCSITASKMGMT_TASKTYPE_TARGET_RESET;
>  	tm_req.host_tag = cpu_to_le16(drv_cmd->host_tag);

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260818231426.58105-1-chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com?part=8

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-18 18:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-18 23:14 [PATCH 0/17] mpi3mr: fix out-of-bounds accesses and reference leaks Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 01/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow in BSG passthrough request copy Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:14   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 02/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read when copying BSG MPI requests Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:15   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 03/17] mpi3mr: Fix I/O block counter leak on admin request post failure Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:11   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 04/17] mpi3mr: Fix target device reference leak in BSG task management Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 05/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow when caching log data Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 06/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds reply frame access Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:11   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 07/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds sense buffer access Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:11   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 08/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:13   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 09/17] mpi3mr: Fix target device reference leak in device removal handshake Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 10/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in SAS topology change events Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:10   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 11/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read of event data Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:16   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 12/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds phy array access on link change Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:33   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 13/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow in the BSG target device map Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 14/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in PCIe topology change events Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 15/17] mpi3mr: zero out diagnostic buffer status memory Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:21   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 16/17] mpi3mr: Fix use-after-free of the firmware event workqueue Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 17/17] mpi3mr: Fix NULL pointer dereference on PCI error recovery Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:32   ` sashiko-bot

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=20260818181328.867D91F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@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.