From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Lee Jones" <lee@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] HID: wacom: Fix Use-After-Free in wacom_intuos_pad
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2026 12:26:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260707122656.C6AB71F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260707121051.1683937-2-lee@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Pre-existing use-after-free race between kref_put() in wacom_remove_shared_data() and list traversal in wacom_get_hdev_data().
- [High] Lockless reads of `shared->pen` and `shared->touch` lead to TOCTOU Use-After-Free.
--
--- Patch [2]: [PATCH 2/4] HID: wacom: Fix Use-After-Free in wacom_intuos_pad ---
commit 7367a08b48f1d1fc2e7dc8823f95547c3c03eb51
Author: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
HID: wacom: Fix Use-After-Free in wacom_intuos_pad
wacom_intuos_pad() accesses wacom->shared->touch_input locklessly
inside the interrupt handler context. If the Touch sibling device
is disconnected, wacom_remove_shared_data() clears touch_input
outside any lock, creating a Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU)
race condition.
Resolve this by introducing RCU protection for the touch_input
pointer.
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/wacom_sys.c b/drivers/hid/wacom_sys.c
> index 6c2a3ddfe366a..c6b37931d02d1 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/wacom_sys.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/wacom_sys.c
> @@ -875,10 +875,16 @@ static void wacom_remove_shared_data(void *res)
> data = container_of(wacom_wac->shared, struct wacom_hdev_data,
> shared);
>
> - if (wacom_wac->shared->touch == wacom->hdev)
> - wacom_wac->shared->touch = NULL;
> - else if (wacom_wac->shared->pen == wacom->hdev)
> - wacom_wac->shared->pen = NULL;
> + scoped_guard(mutex, &wacom_udev_list_lock) {
> + if (wacom_wac->shared->touch == wacom->hdev) {
> + wacom_wac->shared->touch = NULL;
> + rcu_assign_pointer(wacom_wac->shared->touch_input, NULL);
> + } else if (wacom_wac->shared->pen == wacom->hdev) {
> + wacom_wac->shared->pen = NULL;
> + }
> + }
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but since we are introducing
RCU protection for touch_input, do shared->pen and shared->touch need
similar RCU annotations and read guards?
wacom_mode_change_work() reads both pointers locklessly in preemptible
workqueue context:
drivers/hid/wacom_sys.c:wacom_mode_change_work() {
...
if (shared->pen) {
wacom1 = hid_get_drvdata(shared->pen);
...
if (shared->touch) {
wacom2 = hid_get_drvdata(shared->touch);
...
}
Similarly, wacom_bamboo_pad_pen_event() dereferences shared->pen without
protection:
drivers/hid/wacom_wac.c:wacom_bamboo_pad_pen_event() {
...
hid_input_report(wacom->shared->pen, HID_INPUT_REPORT, data, ...);
...
}
Because these readers run without rcu_read_lock() or guard(rcu), the new
synchronize_rcu() call won't wait for them, potentially leaving them to
dereference freed pointers when the sibling device unbinds. Should pen and
touch also be converted to RCU pointers?
> +
> + synchronize_rcu();
>
> kref_put(&data->kref, wacom_release_shared_data);
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does this lockless kref_put() create a
race condition with concurrent device probes?
If a concurrent unbind and probe occurs, kref_put() can drop the refcount
to 0 and synchronously call wacom_release_shared_data(). Before the
release function can acquire the wacom_udev_list_lock to remove the
object, a concurrent wacom_add_shared_data() might call
wacom_get_hdev_data().
wacom_get_hdev_data() iterates the list under the lock, finds the still-
linked object, and blindly calls kref_get(&data->kref) on the 0-refcount
object:
drivers/hid/wacom_sys.c:wacom_get_hdev_data() {
...
list_for_each_entry(data, &wacom_udev_list, list) {
if (strncmp(data->phys, hdev->phys, sizeof(data->phys) - 2) == 0) {
kref_get(&data->kref);
return data;
}
...
}
When the lock is dropped, the release function proceeds to kfree() the
object, leaving the prober with a freed pointer. Should this be using
kref_put_mutex() or kref_get_unless_zero() to safely handle the list
removal?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260707121051.1683937-1-lee@kernel.org?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-07 12:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-07 12:10 [PATCH 1/4] HID: wacom: Advertise SW_MUTE_DEVICE capability prior to registration Lee Jones
2026-07-07 12:10 ` [PATCH 2/4] HID: wacom: Fix Use-After-Free in wacom_intuos_pad Lee Jones
2026-07-07 12:26 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-07 12:10 ` [PATCH 3/4] HID: wacom: Fix Use-After-Free in wacom_bamboo_pad Lee Jones
2026-07-07 12:27 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 12:10 ` [PATCH 4/4] HID: wacom: Redesign shared sibling data lifecycle Lee Jones
2026-07-07 12:25 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 12:28 ` [PATCH 1/4] HID: wacom: Advertise SW_MUTE_DEVICE capability prior to registration sashiko-bot
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=20260707122656.C6AB71F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--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