Linux SCSI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Chandrakanth Patil" <chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 18:13:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260818181328.867D91F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260818231426.58105-9-chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:

New issues:
- [High] Placement of the newly added bounds check introduces a delayed command queue stall and async chain breakage.

Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] Concurrent lockless modification of delayed lists from process and IRQ contexts.
- [High] TOCTOU race window during delayed command hardware dispatch allows double-free.
--

--- Patch [8]: [PATCH 08/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal ---
commit 498a49c2b9e406ac25107bbe9cd216b5c786f292
Author: Chandrakanth Patil <chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>

mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal

Device handles reported by the controller are used to index the remove
pending bitmap and to build a task management request without being
compared against the maximum handle the controller reported.

Check the handle before using it.

> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c b/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> index f80a21ec161b6..7ae4b4fad3f4a 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> @@ -2401,7 +2401,8 @@ static void mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou(struct mpi3mr_ioc *mrioc,
>  		ioc_info(mrioc,
>  		    "%s :dev removal handshake completed successfully: handle(0x%04x)\n",
>  		    __func__, drv_cmd->dev_handle);
> -		clear_bit(drv_cmd->dev_handle, mrioc->removepend_bitmap);
> +		if (drv_cmd->dev_handle < mrioc->facts.max_devhandle)
> +			clear_bit(drv_cmd->dev_handle, mrioc->removepend_bitmap);
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!list_empty(&mrioc->delayed_rmhs_list)) {

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but is there a race window here if the
hardware request completes extremely quickly?

mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm() sends the request to hardware. Only after it
returns does the code list_del() and kfree() the delayed_dev_rmhs node:

mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou()
{
        ...
        mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm(mrioc, drv_cmd->dev_handle, drv_cmd,
            drv_cmd->iou_rc);
        list_del(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list);
        kfree(delayed_dev_rmhs);
        return;
}

If the completion executes concurrently and triggers another call to
mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou(), could it dequeue and dispatch the exact
same node before the first thread has a chance to remove it, leading to
a double-free?

Similar patterns seem to exist in mpi3mr_complete_evt_ack().

[Severity: Critical]
This is also a pre-existing issue, but I noticed there might be unprotected
list operations on delayed_rmhs_list.

The delayed_rmhs_list is appended to in mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm():

        list_add_tail(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list,
            &mrioc->delayed_rmhs_list);

And it is removed from in mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou():

        list_del(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list);

Are these list operations safe from concurrent modifications between process
and IRQ contexts, or should they be protected by a spinlock to prevent
list corruption? Similar patterns exist for delayed_evtack_cmds_list.

[ ... ]

> @@ -2564,6 +2565,12 @@ static void mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm(struct mpi3mr_ioc *mrioc, u16 handle,
>  	drv_cmd->callback = mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_tm;
>  	drv_cmd->dev_handle = handle;
>  	drv_cmd->iou_rc = iou_rc;
> +	if (handle >= mrioc->facts.max_devhandle) {
> +		ioc_err(mrioc, "dev_remove_hs: handle(0x%04x) >= max_devhandle(0x%04x)\n",
> +			handle, mrioc->facts.max_devhandle);
> +		goto out_failed;
> +	}
> +

[Severity: High]
If handle >= mrioc->facts.max_devhandle, the code goes to out_failed.
This frees the command slot synchronously but does not invoke the
completion callback.

If this was called from mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_complete_iou() to process a delayed
command, would this synchronous failure prevent any subsequent delayed
items from being processed since the completion chain is broken?

Also, because this check is placed here, out-of-bounds handles can still be
appended to the delayed_rmhs_list earlier in this function when command
slots are full:

mpi3mr_dev_rmhs_send_tm()
{
        ...
        if (cmd_idx >= MPI3MR_NUM_DEVRMCMD) {
                delayed_dev_rmhs = kzalloc_obj(*delayed_dev_rmhs, GFP_ATOMIC);
                ...
                delayed_dev_rmhs->handle = handle;
                list_add_tail(&delayed_dev_rmhs->list, ...);
                return;
        }
        ...
}

Should the bounds check happen before allocating and adding to the delayed
list?

>  	tm_req.dev_handle = cpu_to_le16(handle);
>  	tm_req.task_type = MPI3_SCSITASKMGMT_TASKTYPE_TARGET_RESET;
>  	tm_req.host_tag = cpu_to_le16(drv_cmd->host_tag);

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260818231426.58105-1-chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com?part=8

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-18 18:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-18 23:14 [PATCH 0/17] mpi3mr: fix out-of-bounds accesses and reference leaks Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 01/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow in BSG passthrough request copy Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:14   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 02/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read when copying BSG MPI requests Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:15   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 03/17] mpi3mr: Fix I/O block counter leak on admin request post failure Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:11   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 04/17] mpi3mr: Fix target device reference leak in BSG task management Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 05/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow when caching log data Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 06/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds reply frame access Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:11   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 07/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds sense buffer access Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:11   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 08/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:13   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 09/17] mpi3mr: Fix target device reference leak in device removal handshake Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 10/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in SAS topology change events Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:10   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 11/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read of event data Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:16   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 12/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds phy array access on link change Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:33   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 13/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow in the BSG target device map Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 14/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in PCIe topology change events Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 15/17] mpi3mr: zero out diagnostic buffer status memory Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:21   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 16/17] mpi3mr: Fix use-after-free of the firmware event workqueue Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 23:14 ` [PATCH 17/17] mpi3mr: Fix NULL pointer dereference on PCI error recovery Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-18 18:32   ` 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=20260818181328.867D91F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@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