From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Long Li" <longli@microsoft.com>
Cc: linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/7] net: mana: free HWC comp_buf after destroying the EQ
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2026 03:30:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260716033019.9C8CD1F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260715032942.3945317-4-longli@microsoft.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Use-after-free of TX and RX work queues during HWC channel destruction due to incorrect teardown ordering.
- [High] Data corruption and premature completion due to msg_id reuse after timeout in mana_hwc_send_request().
- [High] Use-after-free of gdma_context (gc) due to un-canceled service work during device removal.
--
--- Patch [3]: [PATCH net-next 3/7] net: mana: free HWC comp_buf after destroying the EQ ---
commit 0772412f368270fa1d8812b8355a2560f063690d
Author: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
Subject: net: mana: free HWC comp_buf after destroying the EQ
This patch resolves a use-after-free issue by deferring the release of
the hardware channel completion buffer until after the event queue has been
destroyed. This ensures no late interrupts can access the freed memory.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c
[ ... ]
> static void mana_hwc_destroy_cq(struct gdma_context *gc, struct hwc_cq *hwc_cq)
> {
[ ... ]
> if (hwc_cq->gdma_eq)
> mana_gd_destroy_queue(gc, hwc_cq->gdma_eq);
>
> + kfree(hwc_cq->comp_buf);
> kfree(hwc_cq);
> }
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but while looking at teardown
ordering, could there be a similar use-after-free with the TX and RX work
queues?
In mana_hwc_destroy_channel(), the work queues are freed before the
completion queue:
mana_hwc_destroy_channel() {
if (hwc->txq)
mana_hwc_destroy_wq(hwc, hwc->txq);
if (hwc->rxq)
mana_hwc_destroy_wq(hwc, hwc->rxq);
if (hwc->cq)
mana_hwc_destroy_cq(hwc->gdma_dev->gdma_context, hwc->cq);
}
If an interrupt fires before the CQ and EQ are destroyed, will the
completion handler still attempt to dereference the already freed work
queues?
mana_hwc_rx_event_handler() {
struct hw_channel_context *hwc = ctx;
struct hwc_wq *hwc_rxq = hwc->rxq;
...
rq = hwc_rxq->gdma_wq;
...
}
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does mana_hwc_send_request() have a
race condition if a request times out?
If a timeout occurs, mana_hwc_send_request() releases the msg_id while the
hardware might still be processing it:
mana_hwc_send_request() {
...
err = -ETIMEDOUT;
goto out;
...
out:
mana_hwc_put_msg_index(hwc, msg_id);
}
Could another caller subsequently allocate the same msg_id and assign its
own stack buffer? If the hardware then completes the original delayed
request, would the handler overwrite the new caller's buffer with the old
response?
mana_hwc_handle_resp() {
ctx = hwc->caller_ctx + msg_id;
...
memcpy(ctx->output_buf, resp_msg, resp_len);
...
complete(&ctx->comp_event);
}
[Severity: High]
This is also a pre-existing issue, but could there be a use-after-free
during device removal if service work is pending?
In mana_gd_remove(), the gdma_context is freed without canceling pending
work on the system workqueue:
mana_gd_remove() {
...
mana_gd_cleanup_device(pdev);
xa_destroy(&gc->irq_contexts);
pci_iounmap(pdev, gc->bar0_va);
vfree(gc);
}
If the delayed work handler executes concurrently with or after device
removal, will it dereference the freed pointer?
mana_serv_reset() {
struct gdma_context *gc = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
struct hw_channel_context *hwc;
...
hwc = gc->hwc.driver_data;
}
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260715032942.3945317-1-longli@microsoft.com?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-16 3:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-15 3:29 [PATCH net-next 0/7] net: mana: harden the HWC and add dynamic queue depth Long Li
2026-07-15 3:29 ` [PATCH net-next 1/7] net: mana: RCU-protect gc->cq_table lookups against concurrent CQ destroy Long Li
2026-07-15 3:29 ` [PATCH net-next 2/7] net: mana: fix HWC RQ/SQ buffer size swap Long Li
2026-07-16 3:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-15 3:29 ` [PATCH net-next 3/7] net: mana: free HWC comp_buf after destroying the EQ Long Li
2026-07-16 3:30 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-15 3:29 ` [PATCH net-next 4/7] net: mana: validate hardware-supplied values in the HWC RX path Long Li
2026-07-16 3:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-15 3:29 ` [PATCH net-next 5/7] net: mana: fix HWC teardown safety with setup_active flag and destroy ordering Long Li
2026-07-16 3:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-15 3:29 ` [PATCH net-next 6/7] net: mana: support concurrent HWC requests with proper synchronization Long Li
2026-07-16 3:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-15 3:29 ` [PATCH net-next 7/7] net: mana: add dynamic HWC queue depth with reinit path Long Li
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=20260716033019.9C8CD1F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longli@microsoft.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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