public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Yi Yang <yiyang13@huawei.com>
Cc: jirislaby@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tty: vt: selection: fix soft lockup in paste_selection()
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:38:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2024040943-tightwad-handcuff-5eb7@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240313094529.679957-1-yiyang13@huawei.com>

On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 09:45:29AM +0000, Yi Yang wrote:
> Soft lockup occurs when vt device used n_null ldisc, n_null_receivebuf()
> is not implemented in null_ldisc. So tty_ldisc_receive_buf always return
> 0 in paste_selection(), this cause deadloop and cause soft lockup.

Why is a vt using n_null?

What is causing that?

> 
> This can be reproduced as follows:
>   int ldisc = 0x1b; // 0x1b is n_null
>   struct{
>   	char subcode;
>   	struct tiocl_selection sel;
>   } data;
>   date.subcode = TIOCL_SETSEL;
>   data.sel.xs = 0;
>   data.sel.xe = 1;
>   data.sel.ys = 0;
>   data.sel.ye = 1;
>   data.sel.sel_mode = TIOCL_SELCHAR;
>   char bytes[2] = {TIOCL_PASTESEL, 0};
>   open("ttyxx", O_RDWR) // open a vt device
>   ioctl(fd, TIOCSETD, &ldisc) // set ldisc to n_null
>   ioctl(fd, TIOCLINUX, &data.subcode);
>   ioctl(fd, TIOCLINUX, bytes); // cause deadloop
> 
> Fix soft lockup by check receive_buf() and receive_buf2() is NULL.

As you had permissions to do this, why prevent it?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Yi Yang <yiyang13@huawei.com>
> ---
> 
> v2:Change Check Condition.
> 
>  drivers/tty/vt/selection.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/vt/selection.c b/drivers/tty/vt/selection.c
> index 564341f1a74f..715e111376a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/vt/selection.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/vt/selection.c
> @@ -397,6 +397,12 @@ int paste_selection(struct tty_struct *tty)
>  	ld = tty_ldisc_ref_wait(tty);
>  	if (!ld)
>  		return -EIO;	/* ldisc was hung up */
> +
> +	/*tty_ldisc_receive_buf() won't do anything and cause deadloop later*/

Comments need to be properly formated.

And I do not understand this comment sorry.

> +	if (!ld->ops->receive_buf && !ld->ops->receive_buf2) {

Why check reciev_buf pointers here?  What is that causing?

This needs to be documented a lot better please.

thanks,

greg k-h

      reply	other threads:[~2024-04-09 13:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-13  9:45 [PATCH v2] tty: vt: selection: fix soft lockup in paste_selection() Yi Yang
2024-04-09 13:38 ` Greg KH [this message]

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=2024040943-tightwad-handcuff-5eb7@gregkh \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yiyang13@huawei.com \
    /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