Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Carlos López" <clopez@suse.de>
To: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Carlos López" <clopez@suse.de>, "Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>,
	"Oliver Upton" <oupton@kernel.org>,
	"Joey Gouly" <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
	"Steffen Eiden" <seiden@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Suzuki K Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	"Zenghui Yu" <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
	"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated list:KERNEL
	VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR ARM64 (KVM/arm64))
Subject: [PATCH v2] KVM: arm64: vgic: Fix race between LPI release and re-registration
Date: Fri,  3 Jul 2026 04:15:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260703021508.2593100-2-clopez@suse.de> (raw)

Fix a potential race between decrementing an LPI's reference count and
evicting that structure from the LPI xarray.

LPI structures are maintained in the VGIC LPI xarray (dist->lpi_xa).
When the reference count of an LPI structure drops to zero,
vgic_release_lpi_locked() removes the structure from the xarray and
frees it under the xarray lock.

However, the release of an LPI can race with a concurrent LPI
re-registration with the same INTID via vgic_add_lpi() on another CPU,
since the reference count drop and the xarray eviction are not performed
in a single atomic step. This can happen e.g. if the guest issues a
DISCARD while the LPI is still referenced from a vCPU's active-pending
list (ap_list), and the same INTID is re-mapped via MAPTI.

Particularly, vgic_release_lpi_locked() is called from two distinct
paths: direct release via vgic_put_irq(), and deferred release via
vgic_release_deleted_lpis(). During direct release, the issue can result
in deleting a newly registered LPI from the xarray:

  CPU0 (Releasing LPI)                    CPU1 (Adding new LPI)
  ====================                    =====================
  vgic_put_irq()
      __vgic_put_irq()
          refcount_dec_and_test()
                                          vgic_add_lpi()
                                              xa_lock_irqsave(..);
                                              old_irq = xa_load(&dist->lpi_xa, intid);
                                              vgic_try_get_irq_ref(old_irq) == false
                        new IRQ inserted -->  __xa_store(&dist->lpi_xa, intid, ..)
                                              xa_unlock_irqrestore(..);
  xa_lock_irqsave(..);
  vgic_release_lpi_locked()
      __xa_erase(&dist->lpi_xa, irq->intid);   <-- BUG: new IRQ is erased
      kfree_rcu(old_irq)

During the deferred release path, the old IRQ can be leaked:

  CPU0 (Releasing LPI)                    CPU1 (Adding new LPI)
  ====================                    =====================
  vgic_put_irq_norelease()
      __vgic_put_irq()
          refcount_dec_and_test()
      irq->pending_release = true
                                          vgic_add_lpi()
                                              xa_lock_irqsave(..);
                                              old_irq = xa_load(&dist->lpi_xa, intid);
                                              vgic_try_get_irq_ref() == false
                 BUG: old IRQ overwritten --> __xa_store(&dist->lpi_xa, intid, ..)
                                              xa_unlock_irqrestore(..);

  vgic_release_deleted_lpis()
      xa_lock_irqsave(..);
      xa_for_each() { .. } <-- old IRQ with pending_release = true
                               is gone, so it cannot be released

To fix the direct release path, move the reference count drop inside
the xarray lock, making sure that vgic_add_lpi() never encounters the
to-be-released LPI.

To fix the deferred release path, since the refcount drop must happen
under a raw spinlock, the same solution does not work. Instead, update
vgic_add_lpi(), so that if it evicts a non-NULL refcount=0 LPI from the
xarray, it takes on the responsibility of releasing it. If this happens,
vgic_release_deleted_lpis() will iterate the xarray normally and will
simply not find the already released structure.

Reported-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-6
Fixes: 3a08a6ca7c37 ("KVM: arm64: vgic-v3: Use bare refcount for VGIC LPIs")
Fixes: d54594accf73 ("KVM: arm64: vgic-v3: Erase LPIs from xarray outside of raw spinlocks")
Signed-off-by: Carlos López <clopez@suse.de>
---
v2:
* Address Sashiko's review. Fix the direct release path by decrementing the
  refcount under the xarray spinlock, preventing a UAF that would have been
  introduced in v1.
---
 arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 10 +++++++++-
 arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c     |  5 +++--
 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
index 67d107e9a77d..577286069368 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
@@ -116,7 +116,15 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid,
 		kfree(irq);
 		irq = oldirq;
 	} else {
-		ret = xa_err(__xa_store(&dist->lpi_xa, intid, irq, 0));
+		/*
+		 * The entry is either empty or contains a dead LPI (refcount=0)
+		 * from the deferred release path, pending cleanup by
+		 * vgic_release_deleted_lpis(). Evict and free it if present.
+		 */
+		oldirq = __xa_store(&dist->lpi_xa, intid, irq, 0);
+		ret = xa_err(oldirq);
+		if (!ret && oldirq)
+			kfree_rcu(oldirq, rcu);
 	}
 
 	xa_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_xa, flags);
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
index 5a4768d8cd4f..c32e6c9777e5 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
@@ -167,11 +167,12 @@ void vgic_put_irq(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
 		guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&dist->lpi_xa.xa_lock);
 	}
 
-	if (!__vgic_put_irq(kvm, irq))
+	if (!irq_is_lpi(kvm, irq->intid))
 		return;
 
 	xa_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_xa, flags);
-	vgic_release_lpi_locked(dist, irq);
+	if (refcount_dec_and_test(&irq->refcount))
+		vgic_release_lpi_locked(dist, irq);
 	xa_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_xa, flags);
 }
 

base-commit: 1ee27dacbe5dc4def481794d899d67b0d4570094
-- 
2.51.0



             reply	other threads:[~2026-07-03  2:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-03  2:15 Carlos López [this message]
2026-07-03  8:44 ` [PATCH v2] KVM: arm64: vgic: Fix race between LPI release and re-registration Oliver Upton
2026-07-03  9:16   ` Carlos López

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=20260703021508.2593100-2-clopez@suse.de \
    --to=clopez@suse.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=oupton@kernel.org \
    --cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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