Linux-HyperV List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Shradha Gupta" <shradhagupta@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] arm64/hyperv: Add kexec handler using machine_shutdown hook
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 09:49:43 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260814094943.D7AC11F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260814093208.3191430-1-shradhagupta@linux.microsoft.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:

New issues:
- [High] Concurrent module unload and kexec execution causes a Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Use-After-Free/NULL pointer dereference.

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] vmbus_initiate_unload() ignores vmbus_post_msg() errors, hanging kexec indefinitely on wait_for_completion().
--

--- Patch [2]: [RFC PATCH 2/2] arm64/hyperv: Add kexec handler using machine_shutdown hook ---
commit 49c11bb6b5ac02d64fdd78fc6417342ccc8089ed
Author: Shradha Gupta <shradhagupta@linux.microsoft.com>

arm64/hyperv: Add kexec handler using machine_shutdown hook

This patch provides the ARM64 override of hv_setup_kexec_handler() and
hv_remove_kexec_handler(). It wires the registered hv_kexec_handler to
arm64_pre_smp_shutdown_hook to perform VMBus teardown and disable SynIC
during kexec.

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c b/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c
> index 4fdc26ade1d74..4176175060d30 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -15,10 +15,47 @@
>  #include <linux/errno.h>
>  #include <linux/version.h>
>  #include <linux/cpuhotplug.h>
> +#include <linux/kexec.h>
>  #include <asm/mshyperv.h>
> +#include <asm/system_misc.h>
>  
>  static bool hyperv_initialized;
>  
> +/*
> + * Kexec/shutdown handler for ARM64 Hyper-V guests.
> + *
> + * On x86, hv_machine_shutdown() overrides machine_ops.shutdown and
> + * runs after device_shutdown() and cpu_hotplug_enable(). ARM64 uses
> + * the arm64_pre_smp_shutdown_hook to achieve the same ordering.
> + *
> + * hv_kexec_handler() (set by vmbus_drv.c) performs:
> + *   1. vmbus_initiate_unload(false) - sends CHANNELMSG_UNLOAD
> + *   2. cpuhp_remove_state(hyperv_cpuhp_online) - disables SynIC per CPU
> + *
> + * By running after device_shutdown(), PCI drivers (NVMe, MANA) can
> + * send PCI_DELETE_INTERRUPT_MESSAGE and clean up MMIO/interrupt
> + * mappings before VMBus channels are force-closed by UNLOAD.
> + */
> +static void (*hv_kexec_handler)(void);
> +
> +static void hv_machine_shutdown(void)
> +{
> +	if (kexec_in_progress && hv_kexec_handler)
> +		hv_kexec_handler();

[Severity: High]
Is there a race condition here if the hv_vmbus module is unloaded concurrently?

If sys_delete_module() calls hv_remove_kexec_handler(), it clears
hv_kexec_handler to NULL. If that happens after the check here but before
execution, could this jump to a NULL pointer? Or if the module memory is freed
before execution, could this cause a use-after-free panic? A simple READ_ONCE()
would prevent a compiler double-fetch, but might not prevent the underlying
use-after-free without proper synchronization like RCU or a mutex.

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but enabling this path on ARM64 exposes the
system to a potential indefinite hang during kexec.

When hv_kexec_handler() calls vmbus_initiate_unload(false), it ignores errors
from vmbus_post_msg() and unconditionally waits for completion:

drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c:vmbus_initiate_unload() {
	...
	vmbus_post_msg(&hdr, sizeof(struct vmbus_channel_message_header),
		       !crash);

	/*
	 * vmbus_initiate_unload() is also called on crash and the crash can be
	 * happening in an interrupt context, where scheduling is impossible.
	 */
	if (!crash)
		wait_for_completion(&vmbus_connection.unload_event);
	...
}

If vmbus_post_msg() fails (e.g., returning -ENOBUFS if the hypervisor is out
of buffers), the unload message is never sent, the completion is never
signaled, and the thread waits forever. Is there a way to handle this error
instead of hanging the reboot process?

> +}
> +
> +void hv_setup_kexec_handler(void (*handler)(void))
> +{
> +	hv_kexec_handler = handler;
> +	arm64_pre_smp_shutdown_hook = hv_machine_shutdown;
> +}
> +
> +void hv_remove_kexec_handler(void)
> +{
> +	arm64_pre_smp_shutdown_hook = NULL;
> +	hv_kexec_handler = NULL;
> +}

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260814093133.3191250-1-shradhagupta@linux.microsoft.com?part=2

      reply	other threads:[~2026-08-14  9:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-14  9:31 [RFC PATCH 0/2] arm64/hyperv: Enable kexec reboot support Shradha Gupta
2026-08-14  9:31 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] arm64: Add pre-shutdown hook to machine_shutdown() Shradha Gupta
2026-08-14  9:38   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-14  9:32 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] arm64/hyperv: Add kexec handler using machine_shutdown hook Shradha Gupta
2026-08-14  9:49   ` sashiko-bot [this message]

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=20260814094943.D7AC11F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=shradhagupta@linux.microsoft.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