All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>
Cc: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>,
	Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:08:46 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <874nisbvsh.fsf@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1301071111420.23972@axis700.grange> (Guennadi Liakhovetski's message of "Mon, 7 Jan 2013 12:09:36 +0100 (CET)")

Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> writes:

> (adding Robert to CC)
> I don't think any data is freed by pxa_free_dma(), it only disables DMA on 
> a certain channel. Theoretically there could be a different problem: 
> pxa_free_dma() deactivates DMA, whereas pxa_dma_start_channels() activates 
> it. But I think we're also protected against that: by the time 
> pxa_camera_remove() is called, and operation on the interface has been 
> stopped, client devices have been detached, pxa_camera_remove_device() has 
> been called, which has also stopped the interface clock. And with clock 
> stopped no interrupts can be generated. And the case of interrupt having 
> been generated before clk_disabled() and only delivered to the driver so 
> much later, that we're already unloading the module, seems really 
> impossible to me. Robert, you agree?

Agreed that pxa_free_dma() doesn't free anything, that one is easy :)

And agreed too for the second part, with a slighly different explanation :
 - pxa_camera_remove_device() has been called as you said
 - inside this function, check comment
   "/* disable capture, disable interrupts */"
   => this ensures no interrupt can be generated anymore

So after pxa_camera_remove_device() has been called, no interrupts can be
generated.

Yet as you said, it leaves the "almost impossible" scenario :
 - a user begins a capture
 - the user closes the capture device and unloads pxa-camera.ko:
     soc_camera_close()
       pxa_camera_remove_device()
         the IRQ line is asserted but doesn't trigger yet the interrupt handler
         (yes I know, improbable)
         meanwhile, IRQs are disabled, DMA channels are stopped
     switch_to(rmmod)
       => yes I know, impossible, the interrupt handler must be run before, but
       let's continue for love of discussion ...
     rmmod pxa-camera
       pxa_camera_remove()
         pxa_free_dma() * 3
         ----> here the IRQ handler kicks in !!!
               => pxa_camera_irq()
                    pxa_dma_start_channels()
         ----> it hurts !

My call is that this is impossible because the switch_to() should run the IRQ
handler before pxa_camera_remove() is called.

So all this to say that I think we're safe, unless a heavy ion or a cosmic ray
strikes the PXA :)

Cheers.

--
Robert

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>
Cc: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>,
	Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access to invalid data
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:08:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <874nisbvsh.fsf@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1301071111420.23972@axis700.grange> (Guennadi Liakhovetski's message of "Mon, 7 Jan 2013 12:09:36 +0100 (CET)")

Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> writes:

> (adding Robert to CC)
> I don't think any data is freed by pxa_free_dma(), it only disables DMA on 
> a certain channel. Theoretically there could be a different problem: 
> pxa_free_dma() deactivates DMA, whereas pxa_dma_start_channels() activates 
> it. But I think we're also protected against that: by the time 
> pxa_camera_remove() is called, and operation on the interface has been 
> stopped, client devices have been detached, pxa_camera_remove_device() has 
> been called, which has also stopped the interface clock. And with clock 
> stopped no interrupts can be generated. And the case of interrupt having 
> been generated before clk_disabled() and only delivered to the driver so 
> much later, that we're already unloading the module, seems really 
> impossible to me. Robert, you agree?

Agreed that pxa_free_dma() doesn't free anything, that one is easy :)

And agreed too for the second part, with a slighly different explanation :
 - pxa_camera_remove_device() has been called as you said
 - inside this function, check comment
   "/* disable capture, disable interrupts */"
   => this ensures no interrupt can be generated anymore

So after pxa_camera_remove_device() has been called, no interrupts can be
generated.

Yet as you said, it leaves the "almost impossible" scenario :
 - a user begins a capture
 - the user closes the capture device and unloads pxa-camera.ko:
     soc_camera_close()
       pxa_camera_remove_device()
         the IRQ line is asserted but doesn't trigger yet the interrupt handler
         (yes I know, improbable)
         meanwhile, IRQs are disabled, DMA channels are stopped
     switch_to(rmmod)
       => yes I know, impossible, the interrupt handler must be run before, but
       let's continue for love of discussion ...
     rmmod pxa-camera
       pxa_camera_remove()
         pxa_free_dma() * 3
         ----> here the IRQ handler kicks in !!!
               => pxa_camera_irq()
                    pxa_dma_start_channels()
         ----> it hurts !

My call is that this is impossible because the switch_to() should run the IRQ
handler before pxa_camera_remove() is called.

So all this to say that I think we're safe, unless a heavy ion or a cosmic ray
strikes the PXA :)

Cheers.

--
Robert

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-01-07 20:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-01-07  9:00 [PATCH 0/2] reposition free_irq to avoid access to invalid data Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 10:00 ` Julia Lawall
2013-01-07  9:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] drivers/crypto/bfin_crc.c: " Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 10:00   ` Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 10:00   ` Julia Lawall
2013-01-20  0:12   ` Herbert Xu
2013-01-20  0:12     ` Herbert Xu
2013-01-20  0:12     ` Herbert Xu
2013-01-07  9:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access to i Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 10:00   ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access to invalid data Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 11:09   ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-01-07 11:09     ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access to invalid data Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-01-07 11:18     ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 11:18       ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access to invalid data Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 11:33       ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-01-07 11:33         ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access to invalid data Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-01-07 20:08     ` Robert Jarzmik [this message]
2013-01-07 20:08       ` Robert Jarzmik
2013-01-07 21:09       ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access Julia Lawall
2013-01-07 21:09         ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/pxa_camera.c: reposition free_irq to avoid access to invalid data Julia Lawall

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=874nisbvsh.fsf@free.fr \
    --to=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
    --cc=Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr \
    --cc=g.liakhovetski@gmx.de \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mchehab@redhat.com \
    /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.