Kernel KVM virtualization development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] vfio/pci: clear vdev->msi_perm after freeing it on init failure
@ 2026-07-05  1:40 Xiang Mei
  2026-07-05  1:54 ` sashiko-bot
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Xiang Mei @ 2026-07-05  1:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alex Williamson
  Cc: kvm, linux-kernel, Eric Auger, Li Qiang, Weiming Shi, Xiang Mei

vfio_msi_cap_len() lazily allocates the per-device MSI permission table:

	vdev->msi_perm = kmalloc_obj(struct perm_bits, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
	if (!vdev->msi_perm)
		return -ENOMEM;

	ret = init_pci_cap_msi_perm(vdev->msi_perm, len, flags);
	if (ret) {
		kfree(vdev->msi_perm);
		return ret;		/* vdev->msi_perm left dangling */
	}

When init_pci_cap_msi_perm() -> alloc_perm_bits() fails with -ENOMEM, the
error path frees vdev->msi_perm but leaves the freed pointer stored in
it. vdev->msi_perm is not re-zeroed later because struct
vfio_pci_core_device is per-device and persists across open/close cycles,
and the vfio_config_init() error path returns without calling
vfio_config_free(). So the dangling pointer outlives the failed open.

That leads to two use-after-frees on the same device:

1. Reuse. The next vfio_config_init() sees the stale pointer at
   "if (vdev->msi_perm) return len;" and reuses the freed object. MSI
   config accesses in vfio_pci_config_rw_single() then dereference and
   call the freed perm->readfn / perm->writefn function pointers.

2. Double free. A later vfio_config_free() runs free_perm_bits() and
   kfree() on the already-freed object.

Fix it by NULLing vdev->msi_perm after the kfree(), matching the
NULL-after-free discipline already used in free_perm_bits() and
vfio_config_free().

  BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in vfio_pci_config_rw_single (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:1961)
  Read of size 8 at addr ffff88800fcc88d0 by task exploit/143
  Call Trace:
   ...
   kasan_report (mm/kasan/report.c:595)
   vfio_pci_config_rw_single (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:1961)
   vfio_pci_config_rw (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:1986)
   vfio_pci_rw (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c:1599)
   vfs_read (fs/read_write.c:572)
   __x64_sys_pread64 (fs/read_write.c:764)
   do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94)
   ...

Followed on device close by a double free of the same object:

  Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
    0x1f63e0e8000008: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI
  RIP: 0010:kfree (mm/slub.c:6711)
  Call Trace:
   vfio_config_free (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:1861)
   vfio_pci_core_disable (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c:685)
   vfio_pci_core_close_device (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c:777)
   vfio_df_close (drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c:602)
   vfio_device_fops_release (drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c:648)
   __fput (fs/file_table.c:512)
   __x64_sys_close (fs/open.c:1496)
   do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94)
   ...
  Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception

Fixes: 30ea32ab1951 ("vfio/pci: Fix potential memory leak in vfio_msi_cap_len")
Reported-by: Weiming Shi <bestswngs@gmail.com>
Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
Signed-off-by: Xiang Mei <xmei5@asu.edu>
---
 drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c
index a10ed733f0e3..9914f3ac69ae 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c
@@ -1272,6 +1272,7 @@ static int vfio_msi_cap_len(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u8 pos)
 	ret = init_pci_cap_msi_perm(vdev->msi_perm, len, flags);
 	if (ret) {
 		kfree(vdev->msi_perm);
+		vdev->msi_perm = NULL;
 		return ret;
 	}
 
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] vfio/pci: clear vdev->msi_perm after freeing it on init failure
  2026-07-05  1:40 [PATCH] vfio/pci: clear vdev->msi_perm after freeing it on init failure Xiang Mei
@ 2026-07-05  1:54 ` sashiko-bot
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: sashiko-bot @ 2026-07-05  1:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Xiang Mei; +Cc: kvm

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] Heap buffer overflow in vfio_cap_init() and vfio_ecap_init() due to missing bounds check on capability length.
--

commit 5867deb8ee022404d313dea6794c1dc0a44460cb
Author: Xiang Mei <xmei5@asu.edu>

vfio/pci: clear vdev->msi_perm after freeing it on init failure

This commit clears the vdev->msi_perm pointer after freeing it during an
init_pci_cap_msi_perm() failure. This prevents a use-after-free and a double
free of the MSI permission table when vfio_config_init() fails.

> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c
> index a10ed733f0e3a..9914f3ac69aef 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c
> @@ -1272,6 +1272,7 @@ static int vfio_msi_cap_len(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u8 pos)
>  	ret = init_pci_cap_msi_perm(vdev->msi_perm, len, flags);
>  	if (ret) {
>  		kfree(vdev->msi_perm);
> +		vdev->msi_perm = NULL;
>  		return ret;
>  	}

[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but there appears to be a heap buffer overflow
due to missing bounds checks on capability lengths.

In vfio_cap_init(), if a PCI device advertises a capability where the offset
'pos' plus length 'len' exceeds 'pdev->cfg_size', can this memset() write out
of bounds on the heap?

drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:vfio_cap_init() {
    ...
		memset(map + pos, cap, len);
		ret = vfio_fill_vconfig_bytes(vdev, pos, len);
    ...
}

Similarly, in vfio_ecap_init(), extended capabilities are not bounds-checked
against the buffer size:

drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:vfio_ecap_init() {
    ...
		memset(map + epos, ecap, len);
		ret = vfio_fill_vconfig_bytes(vdev, epos, len);
    ...
}

This out-of-bounds write would then continue into vfio_fill_vconfig_bytes():

drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:vfio_fill_vconfig_bytes() {
    ...
			*dwordp = cpu_to_le32(dword);
    ...
}

Should we validate that the capability length fits within the configuration
space buffer before performing these writes?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260705014010.1297885-1-xmei5@asu.edu?part=1

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-05  1:54 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-05  1:40 [PATCH] vfio/pci: clear vdev->msi_perm after freeing it on init failure Xiang Mei
2026-07-05  1:54 ` sashiko-bot

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox