From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip-ofJRbWXBVFamYgehrs7/Lw@public.gmane.org>,
Jarkko Nikula
<jarkko.nikula-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-spi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: spidev locking ("spi: spidev: fix possible NULL dereference")
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 16:13:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5645FE28.3070501@oracle.com> (raw)
Hi,
I was reviewing some stable commits and came across this, which might
not be wrong, but looks weird in any case:
commit a56166134ad739e7448332e2af2aac59a0b6a385
Author: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date: Thu Sep 10 16:48:13 2015 +0530
spi: spidev: fix possible NULL dereference
The "weird" part is this:
- spidev->speed_hz = spidev->spi->max_speed_hz;
+ if (spidev->spi)
+ spidev->speed_hz = spidev->spi->max_speed_hz;
/* ... after we unbound from the underlying device? */
spin_lock_irq(&spidev->spi_lock);
dofree = (spidev->spi == NULL);
spin_unlock_irq(&spidev->spi_lock);
It would seem strange that the second spidev->spi read requires a
spinlock, but the first one doesn't.
spidev_remove() potentially sets spidev->spi to NULL, and this happens
with the spidev->spi_lock taken, but without the device_list_lock mutex,
and spidev_release() only takes the device_list_lock mutex for the
spidev->spi dereference above, so presumably it is possible for a new
caller to set spidev->spi to NULL while spidev_release() is in progress.
I think it would be great if somebody who knows the code could have a
look into this to see if there is indeed a problem, and there could be
some comments added to the code to explain
1) why it is (not?) okay to check spidev->spi without the spinlock there,
2) why the ->spi_lock is not taken inside the device_list_lock mutex in
spidev_remove(),
3) what are the potential interactions between spidev_release() and
spidev_remove(), if any,
to make it easier to review the code in the future.
Thanks,
Vegard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next reply other threads:[~2015-11-13 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-13 15:13 Vegard Nossum [this message]
[not found] ` <5645FE28.3070501-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-11-13 17:28 ` spidev locking ("spi: spidev: fix possible NULL dereference") Mark Brown
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=5645FE28.3070501@oracle.com \
--to=vegard.nossum-qhclzuegtsvqt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=jarkko.nikula-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-spi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=sudip-ofJRbWXBVFamYgehrs7/Lw@public.gmane.org \
/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