From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Chandrakanth Patil" <chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in PCIe topology change events
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 16:10:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260825161012.5EEE11F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260825210411.301535-15-chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] The bounds check blindly trusts `event_data_length` provided by the hardware without clamping it to the physical size of the DMA reply buffer, failing to prevent out-of-bounds reads in the top-half handlers.
- [High] The patch adds bounds checking to the top-half handler, but fails to prevent the bottom-half handler from being scheduled and iterating out-of-bounds over the same malformed event data.
- [High] The compiler-inserted bounds checks from the `__counted_by` attribute bypass the local variable cache, re-introducing a TOCTOU vulnerability.
- [High] Lockless access to `tgtdev->starget` and `starget->hostdata` leads to a Use-After-Free vulnerability.
--
commit 63bdf6fdca71d0debbf3d9facb074c2cc5e861c5
Author: Chandrakanth Patil <chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com>
mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in PCIe topology change events
This commit bounds the entry count to the received event data before use to
prevent out-of-bounds reads when processing PCIe topology change events.
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c b/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> index 65a6192cf3960..543e9b8e3fc37 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/mpi3mr/mpi3mr_os.c
> @@ -2761,12 +2761,28 @@ static void mpi3mr_pcietopochg_evt_th(struct mpi3mr_ioc *mrioc,
> struct mpi3_event_data_pcie_topology_change_list *topo_evt =
> (struct mpi3_event_data_pcie_topology_change_list *)event_reply->event_data;
> int i;
> - u16 handle;
> - u8 reason_code;
> + u16 handle, avail_len;
> + u8 reason_code, max_entries, num_entries;
> struct mpi3mr_tgt_dev *tgtdev = NULL;
> struct mpi3mr_stgt_priv_data *scsi_tgt_priv_data = NULL;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < topo_evt->num_entries; i++) {
> + avail_len = event_reply->event_data_length * 4;
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but the patch provides an incomplete fix. Does
this code blindly trust event_data_length provided by the hardware without
clamping it to the physical size of the DMA reply buffer?
If a malicious or buggy hardware controller sends a PCIe topology change
event with a large event_data_length (e.g., 255) and a large num_entries,
avail_len could become up to 1020, exceeding the actual physical buffer size
(mrioc->reply_sz, typically 128 bytes).
Since avail_len is not clamped, max_entries would become artificially large,
bypassing the loop bounds check. Could this result in an out-of-bounds read
of kernel memory adjacent to the DMA reply buffer?
> + if (avail_len < offsetof(struct mpi3_event_data_pcie_topology_change_list, port_entry)) {
> + ioc_err(mrioc, "PCIe topology event: event data too small (%u bytes)\n",
> + avail_len);
> + return;
> + }
> + max_entries = (avail_len -
> + offsetof(struct mpi3_event_data_pcie_topology_change_list, port_entry)) /
> + sizeof(struct mpi3_event_pcie_topo_port_entry);
> + num_entries = topo_evt->num_entries;
> + if (num_entries > max_entries) {
> + ioc_err(mrioc, "PCIe topology event: num_entries(%d) exceeds max(%d)\n",
> + num_entries, max_entries);
> + return;
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but the patch's attempt to fix the
bounds check might be bypassed in the bottom half. If the top-half handler
returns early here, what happens to process_evt_bh which was set to 1 prior
to this call by mpi3mr_os_handle_events()?
If process_evt_bh is not cleared, wouldn't the bottom-half handler
mpi3mr_pcietopochg_evt_bh() still be scheduled and iterate out-of-bounds over
the same malformed event data?
mpi3mr_pcietopochg_evt_bh():
for (i = 0; i < event_data->num_entries; i++) {
> + }
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < num_entries; i++) {
> handle = le16_to_cpu(topo_evt->port_entry[i].attached_dev_handle);
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but the patch's attempt to fix the
TOCTOU vulnerability might be nullified. Even though num_entries is cached in
a local variable, doesn't accessing topo_evt->port_entry[i] trigger a
compiler-inserted bounds check because of the __counted_by(num_entries)
attribute in the structure definition?
Under CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS, this would force the compiler to re-read
topo_evt->num_entries directly from DMA memory to perform the bounds check.
If a malicious device modifies this value post-validation, could it trigger
a bounds check failure and panic the kernel?
> if (!handle)
> continue;
> reason_code = topo_evt->port_entry[i].port_status;
> scsi_tgt_priv_data = NULL;
> tgtdev = mpi3mr_get_tgtdev_by_handle(mrioc, handle);
> if (tgtdev && tgtdev->starget && tgtdev->starget->hostdata)
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue that was not addressed, but is it safe to access
tgtdev->starget and starget->hostdata locklessly here?
If mpi3mr_target_destroy() executes concurrently, it can take the lock, set
tgtdev->starget = NULL, release the lock, and call kfree(starget->hostdata).
Could the top-half handler race with this destruction and lead to a
Use-After-Free when dereferencing scsi_tgt_priv_data immediately afterwards?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260825210411.301535-1-chandrakanth.patil@broadcom.com?part=14
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-25 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-25 21:03 [PATCH v2 00/17] scsi: mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds accesses and reference leaks Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 01/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow in BSG passthrough request copy Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 02/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read when copying BSG MPI requests Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:06 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 03/17] mpi3mr: Fix I/O block counter leak on admin request post failure Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:06 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 04/17] mpi3mr: Fix target device reference leak in BSG task management Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:05 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 05/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow when caching log data Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:12 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 06/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds reply frame access Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 07/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds sense buffer access Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 08/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds bitmap access during device removal Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:11 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 09/17] mpi3mr: Fix target device reference leak in device removal handshake Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:20 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 10/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in SAS topology change events Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 17:15 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 11/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read of event data Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:06 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 12/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds phy array access on link change Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 13/17] mpi3mr: Fix buffer overflow in the BSG target device map Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:07 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 14/17] mpi3mr: Fix out-of-bounds read in PCIe topology change events Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:10 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 15/17] mpi3mr: zero out diagnostic buffer status memory Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 16/17] mpi3mr: Fix use-after-free of the firmware event workqueue Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 21:04 ` [PATCH v2 17/17] mpi3mr: Fix NULL pointer dereference on PCI error recovery Chandrakanth Patil
2026-08-25 16:20 ` 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=20260825161012.5EEE11F000E9@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