linux-efi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Popov <alpopov-rHsQqRFQpp1OSnsfY10OVw@public.gmane.org>
To: Peter Jones <pjones-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Matt Fleming
	<matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>,
	Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	Alexander Popov <alpopov-rHsQqRFQpp1OSnsfY10OVw@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in fb_is_primary_device()
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:29:21 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56F52111.6050500@ptsecurity.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56E01B0F.3000306-rHsQqRFQpp1OSnsfY10OVw@public.gmane.org>

On 09.03.2016 15:46, Alexander Popov wrote:
> On 16.02.2016 18:18, Peter Jones wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 01:49:18PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>> [ Including Peter, the efifb maintainer. Original email is here,
>>>
>>>     http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145552936131335&w=2
>>>
>>>   I've snipped some of the quoted text ]
>>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Feb, at 08:55:22AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (I've Cc:-ed the EFI-FB and FB gents. Mail quoted below.)
>>>>
>>>> * Alexander Popov <alpopov-rHsQqRFQpp1OSnsfY10OVw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Currently the code in fb_is_primary_device() contains to_pci_dev() macro
>>>>> which is applied to dev from struct fb_info. In some cases this causes
>>>>> bad memory access when fb_is_primary_device() handles fb_info of efifb.
>>>>> The reason is that fb dev of efifb is embedded into struct platform_device
>>>>> but not into struct pci_dev.
>>>>>
>>>>> We can fix this by checking fb dev bus name in fb_is_primary_device().
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that this bug reveals some bigger problem with to_pci_dev(),
>>>>> to_platform_device() and others, which just do container_of() and
>>>>> don't check whether struct device is a part of the appropriate structure.
>>>>> Should we do something more about it?
>>>>>
>>>>> KASan report:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Popov <alpopov-rHsQqRFQpp1OSnsfY10OVw@public.gmane.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  arch/x86/video/fbdev.c | 9 +++++----
>>>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c b/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
>>>>> index d5644bb..4999f78 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/video/fbdev.c
>>>>> @@ -18,11 +18,12 @@ int fb_is_primary_device(struct fb_info *info)
>>>>>  	struct pci_dev *default_device = vga_default_device();
>>>>>  	struct resource *res = NULL;
>>>>>  
>>>>> -	if (device)
>>>>> -		pci_dev = to_pci_dev(device);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -	if (!pci_dev)
>>>>> +	if (!device || !device->bus ||
>>>>> +		    !device->bus->name || strcmp(device->bus->name, "pci")) {
>>>>>  		return 0;
>>>>> +	}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	pci_dev = to_pci_dev(device);
>>>>>  
>>>>>  	if (default_device) {
>>>>>  		if (pci_dev == default_device)
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> 1.9.1
>>>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder if this issue could explain some of the efifb issues we've
>>> seen reported on bugzilla.kernel.org in the past where switching from
>>> efifb to some other framebuffer device caused hangs during boot. I'm
>>> struggling to find the relevant bugzilla entries now, though.
>>
>> It's possible it could, but I don't have them handy either. 

[...]

>> So it's most likely right for efifb to be embedded in a platform_device
>> instead of a pci_dev.  Which leads back to Alexander's question - if it
>> isn't in a pci_dev, that means fb_is_primary_device() needs to not
>> assume it is.  So the patch appears correct, but so is the question -
>> should to_pci_dev() be checking this and returning NULL here?
> 
> The discussion has suspended. May I activate it again?
> 
> So there are two ways to fix the bad memory access in fb_is_primary_device().
> 
> The first one is proposed in my patch. Checking the bus name string doesn't
> look good but I didn't manage to come up with anything better.
> 
> The second way is changing to_pci_dev() similarly. It may return NULL or
> call BUG() when struct device is a part of an inappropriate structure.
> 
> Which way is better? Do we need to do anything with other similar macros?

Excuse me, there is no reply for a long time. Did I touch any taboo topic?
Hope to fix this bug. Thanks.

Best regards,
Alexander

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-03-25 11:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1455528649-26629-1-git-send-email-alpopov@ptsecurity.com>
     [not found] ` <20160216075521.GA27491@gmail.com>
2016-02-16 13:49   ` [PATCH RFC 1/1] x86: fix bad memory access in fb_is_primary_device() Matt Fleming
     [not found]     ` <20160216134918.GD2769-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>
2016-02-16 15:18       ` Peter Jones
2016-03-09 12:46         ` Alexander Popov
     [not found]           ` <56E01B0F.3000306-rHsQqRFQpp1OSnsfY10OVw@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-25 11:29             ` Alexander Popov [this message]
2016-03-29 11:53               ` Matt Fleming
     [not found]                 ` <20160329115347.GA3625-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-29 12:12                   ` Matt Fleming
     [not found]               ` <56F52111.6050500-rHsQqRFQpp1OSnsfY10OVw@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-31 13:31                 ` Ingo Molnar

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=56F52111.6050500@ptsecurity.com \
    --to=alpopov-rhsqqrfqpp1osnsfy10ovw@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=pjones-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=tomi.valkeinen-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).