From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Logan Gunthorpe" <logang@deltatee.com>
Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
vkoul@kernel.org, Frank.Li@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 6/6] dmaengine: plx_dma: fix NULL pointer deref in plx_dma_isr()
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 22:32:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260717223217.B6FBF1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260717221001.361421-7-logang@deltatee.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 6 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] API Contract Violation: `plx_dma_prep_memcpy` returns with a spinlock held.
- [High] Deadlock during client callback execution due to held spinlock in `plx_dma_process_desc`.
- [High] Memory leak of the descriptor ring in `plx_dma_alloc_chan_resources` on error path.
- [High] Deadlock due to missing bottom-half disable when taking spinlock in `plx_dma_process_desc`.
- [High] Hardware state corruption due to a 16-bit write to a 32-bit MMIO register (`PLX_REG_CTRL`).
- [Medium] Missing `dma_rmb()` memory barrier after reading the DMA completion flag.
--
--- Patch [6]: [PATCH v1 6/6] dmaengine: plx_dma: fix NULL pointer deref in plx_dma_isr() ---
commit bd1bd202047866d5b31f34772f932d4e070c9fd6
Author: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
dmaengine: plx_dma: fix NULL pointer deref in plx_dma_isr()
This patch fixes a NULL pointer dereference in plx_dma_isr(). It moves the
bar assignment ahead of request_irq() to ensure the interrupt handler doesn't
run before plxdev->bar is initialized.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260610112121.676561-1-jjy600901@snu.ac.kr/T/#u
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/plx_dma.c b/drivers/dma/plx_dma.c
> index 84941a918b01f..409898e92c320 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/plx_dma.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/plx_dma.c
> @@ -504,17 +504,17 @@ static int plx_dma_create(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> if (!plxdev)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - rc = request_irq(pci_irq_vector(pdev, 0), plx_dma_isr, 0,
> - KBUILD_MODNAME, plxdev);
> - if (rc)
> - goto free_plx;
> -
> spin_lock_init(&plxdev->ring_lock);
> tasklet_setup(&plxdev->desc_task, plx_dma_desc_task);
>
> RCU_INIT_POINTER(plxdev->pdev, pdev);
> plxdev->bar = pcim_iomap_table(pdev)[0];
>
> + rc = request_irq(pci_irq_vector(pdev, 0), plx_dma_isr, 0,
> + KBUILD_MODNAME, plxdev);
> + if (rc)
> + goto free_plx;
> +
> dma = &plxdev->dma_dev;
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dma->channels);
> dma_cap_set(DMA_MEMCPY, dma->cap_mask);
While reviewing this driver, I noticed a few pre-existing issues in other
functions that might need attention:
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but is it safe to invoke the
client callback while holding the spinlock in plx_dma_process_desc()?
drivers/dma/plx_dma.c:plx_dma_process_desc() {
...
spin_lock(&plxdev->ring_lock);
while (plxdev->tail != plxdev->head) {
desc = plx_dma_get_desc(plxdev, plxdev->tail);
...
dmaengine_desc_get_callback_invoke(&desc->txd, &res);
...
spin_unlock(&plxdev->ring_lock);
}
If a DMA client prepares a new transfer from its completion callback using
dmaengine_prep_dma_memcpy(), it will attempt to re-acquire this same
ring_lock in plx_dma_prep_memcpy(), causing a deadlock. This also affects
plx_dma_abort_desc() which does the same.
[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does plx_dma_prep_memcpy() intentionally
return with the spinlock held?
drivers/dma/plx_dma.c:plx_dma_prep_memcpy() {
...
spin_lock_bh(&plxdev->ring_lock);
...
/* return with the lock held, it will be released in tx_submit */
return &plxdesc->txd;
}
If a client prepares multiple descriptors in sequence before submitting them,
the second call to prep_memcpy() will deadlock trying to acquire the lock
that the first call left held. Furthermore, any client that sleeps, allocates
memory with GFP_KERNEL, or takes a mutex between prep and submit will trigger
a scheduling while atomic panic.
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does the error path in
plx_dma_alloc_chan_resources() leak the descriptor ring?
drivers/dma/plx_dma.c:plx_dma_alloc_chan_resources() {
...
rc = plx_dma_alloc_desc(plxdev);
if (rc)
goto out_free_hw_ring;
rcu_read_lock();
if (!rcu_dereference(plxdev->pdev)) {
rcu_read_unlock();
rc = -ENODEV;
goto out_free_hw_ring;
}
...
out_free_hw_ring:
dma_free_coherent(plxdev->dma_dev.dev, ring_sz, plxdev->hw_ring,
plxdev->hw_ring_dma);
return rc;
}
If rcu_dereference(plxdev->pdev) evaluates to false, the code jumps to
out_free_hw_ring. This frees hw_ring, but fails to free the newly allocated
desc_ring array and its descriptors, causing a memory leak.
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but should plx_dma_process_desc() use
spin_lock_bh() instead of spin_lock()?
drivers/dma/plx_dma.c:plx_dma_process_desc() {
...
spin_lock(&plxdev->ring_lock);
...
}
This function can be called from process context via plx_dma_tx_status().
Because bottom halves are left enabled, a softirq can interrupt the lock
holder and schedule the driver's tasklet (plx_dma_desc_task) on the same CPU,
which will attempt to acquire the lock and deadlock.
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but should plx_dma_issue_pending()
use writel() instead of writew()?
drivers/dma/plx_dma.c:plx_dma_issue_pending() {
...
writew(PLX_REG_CTRL_START_VAL, plxdev->bar + PLX_REG_CTRL);
...
}
PLX_REG_CTRL is treated as a 32-bit register elsewhere in the driver (e.g. in
__plx_dma_stop). Writing a 16-bit value to a 32-bit MMIO target might cause
partial register updates or undefined hardware behavior.
[Severity: Medium]
This is a pre-existing issue, but is a dma_rmb() memory barrier needed after
reading the descriptor status?
drivers/dma/plx_dma.c:plx_dma_process_desc() {
...
flags = le32_to_cpu(READ_ONCE(desc->hw->flags_and_size));
if (flags & PLX_DESC_FLAG_VALID)
break;
...
}
On architectures with relaxed read ordering, reading the completion flag
without a subsequent dma_rmb() might allow the CPU to speculatively read
stale payload data from before the DMA transfer was actually completed by
the hardware.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260717221001.361421-1-logang@deltatee.com?part=6
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-17 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-17 22:09 [PATCH v1 0/6] dmaengine: miscellaneous fixes for ioat, switchtec_dma and plx_dma Logan Gunthorpe
2026-07-17 22:09 ` [PATCH v1 1/6] dmaengine: switchtec-dma: fix double-free in switchtec_dma_free_desc() Logan Gunthorpe
2026-07-17 22:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 22:09 ` [PATCH v1 2/6] dmaengine: switchtec-dma: fix resource leak in alloc_chan_resources Logan Gunthorpe
2026-07-17 22:36 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 22:09 ` [PATCH v1 3/6] dmaengine: switchtec-dma: fix channel leak on registration failure Logan Gunthorpe
2026-07-17 22:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 22:09 ` [PATCH v1 4/6] dmaengine: ioat: disable relaxed ordering before registering the device Logan Gunthorpe
2026-07-17 22:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 22:10 ` [PATCH v1 5/6] dmaengine: ioat: use sysfs_emit() in per-channel sysfs show() Logan Gunthorpe
2026-07-17 22:35 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 22:10 ` [PATCH v1 6/6] dmaengine: plx_dma: fix NULL pointer deref in plx_dma_isr() Logan Gunthorpe
2026-07-17 22:32 ` sashiko-bot [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=20260717223217.B6FBF1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=Frank.Li@kernel.org \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox