From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Tejas Upadhyay" <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: fix UAF race between exec-queue teardown and GuC CT pause-abort
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2026 13:46:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-212921@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261113132149.2989667-2-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential
issue to consider:
- [High] drm/xe: stalled CLEANUP and queue leak in
xe_guc_submit_pause_abort()
--
commit 904ab0c1661eb0e9b87cd4d66b549b254ac2e0f0
Author: Tejas Upadhyay <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>
drm/xe: fix UAF race between exec-queue teardown and GuC CT pause-abort
This commit uses kref_get_unless_zero() in xe_guc_submit_pause_abort() to
skip exec queues whose refcount has already dropped to zero during
concurrent teardown.
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> index 9e7c2778029ca..92290b8be24aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> @@ -3297,12 +3297,18 @@ void xe_guc_submit_pause_abort(struct xe_guc *guc)
> xa_for_each(&guc->submission_state.exec_queue_lookup, index, q) {
> struct xe_gpu_scheduler *sched = &q->guc->sched;
>
> - /* Prevent redundant attempts to stop parallel queues */
> - if (q->guc->id != index)
> + /*
> + * Prevent redundant attempts to stop parallel queues, and skip
> + * queues already dropped to a zero refcount via their own
> + * independent teardown (guc_exec_queue_fini(), xarray entry
> + * not yet erased)
> + */
> + if (q->guc->id != index || !kref_get_unless_zero(&q->refcount))
> continue;
>
> xe_sched_submission_start(sched);
> guc_exec_queue_kill(q);
> + xe_exec_queue_put(q);
> }
> mutex_unlock(&guc->submission_state.lock);
> }
[Severity: High]
Does skipping xe_sched_submission_start(sched) when
kref_get_unless_zero(&q->refcount) fails leave sched permanently stopped
with an unprocessed CLEANUP message, leaking q?
When the final reference to q is dropped via xe_exec_queue_put(),
q->refcount is already zero when xe_exec_queue_destroy() ->
guc_exec_queue_destroy() queues STATIC_MSG_CLEANUP onto sched->msgs to run
teardown asynchronously on sched->work_process_msg:
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c:guc_exec_queue_destroy() {
struct xe_sched_msg *msg = q->guc->static_msgs + STATIC_MSG_CLEANUP;
guc_exec_queue_add_msg(q, msg, CLEANUP);
}
Callers of xe_guc_submit_pause_abort() first stop every scheduler in
exec_queue_lookup via xe_guc_submit_stop() -> xe_sched_submission_stop(),
which stops the workqueue and cancels sched->work_process_msg. During
driver unbind or SR-IOV VF removal, guc_submit_fini() drops references on
wedged queues (and earlier devm release actions such as xe_migrate_fini()
drop kernel queues) right before calling xe_guc_submit_stop(). If
xe_sched_submission_stop() runs before work_process_msg pops
STATIC_MSG_CLEANUP, exec_queue_destroyed(q) is still false, so
guc_exec_queue_stop() does not destroy the queue either.
When xe_guc_submit_pause_abort() then skips xe_sched_submission_start(sched)
because q->refcount is zero, STATIC_MSG_CLEANUP remains stranded on the
stopped scheduler. guc_exec_queue_destroy_async() and guc_exec_queue_fini()
never run, leaking q along with its runtime PM and drm_device references,
leaving its entry in exec_queue_lookup (which trips the xa_empty() assert in
guc_submit_sw_fini()), and hanging xe_file_close() on
xef->exec_queue.pending_removal for user queues.
Should xe_sched_submission_start(sched) be called before checking
kref_get_unless_zero(&q->refcount) so pending CLEANUP messages can still
be processed?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261113132149.2989667-2-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-13 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-13 13:21 [PATCH] drm/xe: fix UAF race between exec-queue teardown and GuC CT pause-abort Tejas Upadhyay
2026-11-13 13:46 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-13 13:58 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for " Patchwork
2026-11-13 14:00 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
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=sashiko-outbox-212921@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tejas.upadhyay@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox