From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: syzbot <syzbot@kernel.org>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/cirrus-qemu: Validate BAR0 size during probe
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 07:44:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260825074432.0B4511F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b11f8965-5896-4119-98b7-6bd0eb9fa139@mail.kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] The exact equality check for BAR0 size (`!= CIRRUS_VRAM_SIZE`) incorrectly rejects valid QEMU configurations with larger VRAM.
- [High] The VRAM size validation check is placed after `aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_devices()`, meaning the firmware framebuffer is permanently destroyed even if the driver ultimately fails to bind.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH] drm/cirrus-qemu: Validate BAR0 size during probe ---
commit 75467ead62a494b6afbc057c666ab59f7e4b8915
Author: Slawomir Stepien <sst@poczta.fm>
drm/cirrus-qemu: Validate BAR0 size during probe
This commit adds a check during PCI probe to verify that the BAR0 resource
length equals CIRRUS_VRAM_SIZE. This is intended to prevent supervisor write
page faults caused by writing past the end of the mapped I/O memory when
smaller BARs are presented.
Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/ai_job?id=ba262a3a-bccf-4ad8-a1b0-583c55d34fd6
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/cirrus-qemu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/cirrus-qemu.c
> index 075221b431d37..70c995025f508 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/cirrus-qemu.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/cirrus-qemu.c
> @@ -602,6 +602,9 @@ static int cirrus_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>
> dev = &cirrus->dev;
>
> + if (pci_resource_len(pdev, 0) != CIRRUS_VRAM_SIZE)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
[Severity: High]
Does this strict equality check unintentionally break valid QEMU
configurations that have more than 4 MB of VRAM?
When a VM is booted with a configuration like -device cirrus-vga,vgamem_mb=8,
the BAR0 size will be 8 MB. The check in cirrus_pci_probe() evaluates
to true (since 8 MB is not equal to 4 MB) and rejects the device by
returning -ENODEV.
Would it be safer to check if pci_resource_len(pdev, 0) < CIRRUS_VRAM_SIZE
instead of requiring an exact match?
[Severity: High]
Is it safe to place this validation check after the call to
aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_devices() earlier in cirrus_pci_probe()?
If this new size check fails (either due to a malformed device or a larger
valid VRAM size), cirrus_pci_probe() aborts with -ENODEV. However, because
aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_devices() was already executed at the start
of the probe function, the firmware framebuffers (like efifb or simplefb)
have been permanently destroyed.
Could this leave the system with a dead display output? Would it make sense
to move this PCI configuration check to the very beginning of the probe
function, before any destructive actions occur?
> cirrus->vram = devm_ioremap(&pdev->dev, pci_resource_start(pdev, 0),
> pci_resource_len(pdev, 0));
> if (cirrus->vram == NULL)
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/b11f8965-5896-4119-98b7-6bd0eb9fa139@mail.kernel.org?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-25 7:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-25 7:36 [PATCH] drm/cirrus-qemu: Validate BAR0 size during probe syzbot
2026-08-25 7:44 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-25 8:00 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2026-08-25 9:46 ` Slawomir Stepien
2026-08-25 10:21 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2026-08-25 11:26 ` Slawomir Stepien
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=20260825074432.0B4511F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=syzbot@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