From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Mete Durlu" <meted@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] s390/diag204: Replace diag204 users with new implementation
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 12:02:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-181408@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261022-diag204ioctl-v2-2-7e5a9d1cd21a@linux.ibm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] s390/diag204: unlocked cache access and unlock imbalance in diag204_store()
- [Medium] s390/diag204: memory leak in diag204_probe() on simple format fallback
--
commit 5ab79951b16e6e4f69656f47d09396782867bf4f
Author: Mete Durlu <meted@linux.ibm.com>
s390/diag204: Replace diag204 users with new implementation
This commit converts the existing kernelspace diag204 users in hypfs and
sthyi to use the new diag204 interface and enables building
arch/s390/kernel/diag/diag204.c.
> diff --git a/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c b/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c
> index 08777f57bd244..c3eebe4667faf 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c
> @@ -22,139 +22,24 @@
[ ... ]
> -static int diag204_probe(void)
> -{
> - void *buf;
> - int pages, rc;
> -
> - buf = diag204_get_buffer(DIAG204_INFO_EXT, &pages);
> - if (!IS_ERR(buf)) {
> - if (diag204((unsigned long)DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7 |
> - (unsigned long)DIAG204_INFO_EXT, pages, buf) >= 0) {
> - diag204_store_sc = DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7;
> - diag204_set_info_type(DIAG204_INFO_EXT);
> - goto out;
> - }
> - if (diag204((unsigned long)DIAG204_SUBC_STIB6 |
> - (unsigned long)DIAG204_INFO_EXT, pages, buf) >= 0) {
> - diag204_store_sc = DIAG204_SUBC_STIB6;
> - diag204_set_info_type(DIAG204_INFO_EXT);
> - goto out;
> - }
> - diag204_free_buffer();
> - }
[Severity: Medium]
Does the replacement diag204_probe() in arch/s390/kernel/diag/diag204.c (now
built via arch/s390/kernel/diag/Makefile) leak the extended format vmalloc
buffer buf when falling back to DIAG204_INFO_SIMPLE?
In the removed hypfs implementation above, diag204_free_buffer() freed the
DIAG204_INFO_EXT buffer if both DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7 and DIAG204_SUBC_STIB6
failed.
In arch/s390/kernel/diag/diag204.c:diag204_probe(), if DIAG204_SUBC_RSI
returns pages > 0 and __diag204_allocate_buffer(pages) succeeds, but both
DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7 and DIAG204_SUBC_STIB6 return a negative error code,
execution falls through to the simple format fallback and overwrites buf
without freeing the first allocation:
arch/s390/kernel/diag/diag204.c:diag204_probe() {
if (pages > 0) {
buf = __diag204_allocate_buffer(pages);
if (!buf) {
rc = -ENOMEM;
goto fail_alloc;
}
type = DIAG204_INFO_EXT;
if (diag204(DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7 | type, pages, buf) >= 0) {
subcode = DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7;
goto out;
}
if (diag204(DIAG204_SUBC_STIB6 | type, pages, buf) >= 0) {
subcode = DIAG204_SUBC_STIB6;
goto out;
}
}
/* extended data format is not available, fallback to simple */
pages = 1;
buf = __diag204_allocate_buffer(pages);
}
Should vfree(buf) (or diag204_free_buffer(buf)) be called before overwriting
buf in the fallback path?
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag_fs.c b/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag_fs.c
> index 39621c3260103..13b5a2a4729d1 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag_fs.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag_fs.c
> @@ -303,15 +303,14 @@ int hypfs_diag_create_files(struct dentry *root)
> struct dentry *systems_dir, *hyp_dir;
> void *time_hdr, *part_hdr;
> void *buffer, *ptr;
> - int i, rc, pages;
> + int i, rc;
>
> - buffer = diag204_get_buffer(diag204_get_info_type(), &pages);
> + buffer = hypfs_diag204_get_buffer();
> if (IS_ERR(buffer))
> return PTR_ERR(buffer);
> - rc = diag204_store(buffer, pages);
> - if (rc)
> + rc = diag204_store(buffer, 0, 0);
> + if (rc < 0)
> return rc;
> -
> systems_dir = hypfs_mkdir(root, "systems");
> if (IS_ERR(systems_dir))
> return PTR_ERR(systems_dir);
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/sthyi.c b/arch/s390/kernel/sthyi.c
> index 5eae2e25997ae..9adb26588d5b5 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/sthyi.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/sthyi.c
> @@ -305,29 +305,19 @@ static struct diag204_x_part_block *lpar_cpu_inf(struct lpar_cpu_inf *part_inf,
>
> static void *diag204_get_data(bool diag204_allow_busy)
> {
> - unsigned long subcode;
> void *diag204_buf;
> - int pages, rc;
> -
> - subcode = DIAG204_SUBC_RSI;
> - subcode |= DIAG204_INFO_EXT;
> - pages = diag204(subcode, 0, NULL);
> - if (pages < 0)
> - return ERR_PTR(pages);
> - if (pages == 0)
> - return ERR_PTR(-ENODATA);
> - diag204_buf = __vmalloc_node(array_size(pages, PAGE_SIZE),
> - PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL, NUMA_NO_NODE,
> - __builtin_return_address(0));
> + int rc;
> +
> + if (!diag204_is_available())
> + return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> + if (diag204_get_subcode() != DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7)
> + return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> + diag204_buf = diag204_allocate_buffer();
> if (!diag204_buf)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> - subcode = DIAG204_SUBC_STIB7;
> - subcode |= DIAG204_INFO_EXT;
> - if (diag204_has_bif() && diag204_allow_busy)
> - subcode |= DIAG204_BIF_BIT;
> - rc = diag204(subcode, pages, diag204_buf);
> + rc = diag204_store(diag204_buf, diag204_allow_busy, 0);
> if (rc < 0) {
> - vfree(diag204_buf);
> + diag204_free_buffer(diag204_buf);
> return ERR_PTR(rc);
> }
> return diag204_buf;
[Severity: Critical]
Can calling diag204_store() with allow_busy=0 and allow_busy_wait=0 from
hypfs_diag_create_files() or fill_dst()->diag204_get_data() (when
is_diag204_cached(sctns) is false) cause unlocked cache access and an
unbalanced mutex_unlock(&diag204_mutex)?
In arch/s390/kernel/diag/diag204.c:diag204_update_cache(), the thread
updating the cache sets g_cache.updating = true and unlocks diag204_mutex
while invoking diag204().
If a second thread concurrently calls diag204_store(buf, 0, 0) while
g_cache.updating is true:
arch/s390/kernel/diag/diag204.c:diag204_store() {
do {
mutex_lock(&diag204_mutex);
/* Exit loop with lock taken if there is no concurrent update */
if (!READ_ONCE(g_cache.updating))
break;
mutex_unlock(&diag204_mutex);
if (allow_busy && !allow_busy_wait)
return -EBUSY;
if (signal_pending(current))
return -ERESTARTSYS;
schedule_timeout_interruptible(DIAG204_BUSY_WAIT);
} while (allow_busy_wait);
if (!diag204_is_cache_valid(DIAG204_CACHE_EXPIRY))
rc = diag204_update_cache(allow_busy, allow_busy_wait);
if (rc >= 0)
memcpy(buf, READ_ONCE(g_cache.buf), diag204_get_buf_size());
mutex_unlock(&diag204_mutex);
}
Because allow_busy is 0 and allow_busy_wait is 0, the loop unlocks
diag204_mutex, does not take the -EBUSY return, sleeps once (or returns
-ERESTARTSYS on a pending signal), and then exits at while (allow_busy_wait)
without holding diag204_mutex.
It then calls diag204_is_cache_valid(), diag204_update_cache(), and
memcpy(buf, READ_ONCE(g_cache.buf), ...) without holding diag204_mutex
(risking a NULL dereference or use-after-free on g_cache.buf against
diag204_set_cache()), followed by an unbalanced mutex_unlock(&diag204_mutex).
Also, in hypfs_diag_create_files(), the previous diag204_store() set
DIAG204_BIF_BIT when supported and waited interruptibly on -EBUSY. Should
hypfs_diag_create_files() pass allow_busy=1, allow_busy_wait=1 (matching
dbfs_d204_create()), and how should diag204_store() handle concurrent
updates when allow_busy=0 and allow_busy_wait=0?
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261022-diag204ioctl-v2-0-7e5a9d1cd21a@linux.ibm.com?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-22 12:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-22 11:49 [PATCH v2 0/3] s390: Diag204 Rework Mete Durlu
2026-10-22 11:49 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] s390/diag204: Introduce diag204 rework Mete Durlu
2026-10-22 12:05 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-22 11:49 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] s390/diag204: Replace diag204 users with new implementation Mete Durlu
2026-10-22 12:02 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-22 11:49 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] s390/diag: Add diag204 IOCTL to diag misc device Mete Durlu
2026-10-22 12:04 ` 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=sashiko-outbox-181408@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=meted@linux.ibm.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