From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Gui-Dong Han <hanguidong02@gmail.com>
Cc: rafael@kernel.org, dakr@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
baijiaju1990@gmail.com, Qiu-ji Chen <chenqiuji666@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] driver core: fix use-after-free of driver_override via driver_match_device()
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 10:16:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2025112726-directly-underfeed-fb07@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251126160011.11649-1-hanguidong02@gmail.com>
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 12:00:11AM +0800, Gui-Dong Han wrote:
> driver_set_override() modifies and frees dev->driver_override while
> holding device_lock(dev). However, driver_match_device() reads
> dev->driver_override when calling bus match functions.
>
> Currently, driver_match_device() is called from three sites. One site
> (__device_attach_driver) holds device_lock(dev), but the other two
> (bind_store and __driver_attach) do not. This allows a concurrent
> driver_set_override() to free the string while driver_match_device() is
> using it, leading to a use-after-free (UAF).
>
> This issue affects at least 11 bus types (including PCI, AMBA, Platform)
> that rely on driver_override for matching.
>
> Fix this by holding device_lock(dev) around the driver_match_device() calls
> in bind_store() and __driver_attach(). This ensures all access to
> dev->driver_override via driver_match_device() is protected by the device
> lock. Also add a lock assertion to driver_match_device() to prevent future
> locking regressions.
>
> Tested with the PoCs from Bugzilla that trigger this UAF. Stress testing
> the two newly locked paths for 24 hours with CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING and
> CONFIG_LOCKDEP enabled showed no UAF recurrence and no lockdep
> warnings.
>
> Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=220789
> Suggested-by: Qiu-ji Chen <chenqiuji666@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Gui-Dong Han <hanguidong02@gmail.com>
> ---
> v2:
> * Add device_lock_assert() in driver_match_device() to enforce locking
> requirement, as suggested by Greg KH.
> v1:
> * The Bugzilla entry contains full KASAN reports and two PoCs that reliably
> reproduce the UAF on both unlocked paths using a standard QEMU setup
> (default e1000 device at 0000:00:03.0).
> I chose to fix this in the driver core for the following reasons:
> 1. Both racing functions are part of the driver core.
> 2. Fixing this per-driver/per-bus is tedious and would require careful
> ad-hoc locking that does not align with the existing device_lock(dev).
> 3. We cannot simply add device_lock(dev) inside bus match functions because
> one call path (__device_attach_driver) already holds this lock. Adding the
> lock inside the match callback would cause a deadlock on that path.
> ---
> drivers/base/base.h | 2 ++
> drivers/base/bus.c | 17 ++++++++++++-----
> drivers/base/dd.c | 3 +++
> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/base.h b/drivers/base/base.h
> index 86fa7fbb3548..011e910a53f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/base.h
> +++ b/drivers/base/base.h
> @@ -166,6 +166,8 @@ void device_set_deferred_probe_reason(const struct device *dev, struct va_format
> static inline int driver_match_device(const struct device_driver *drv,
> struct device *dev)
> {
> + /* Protects against driver_set_override() races */
> + device_lock_assert(dev);
> return drv->bus->match ? drv->bus->match(dev, drv) : 1;
A new line after the assert?
And thanks for adding the comment, but:
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/bus.c b/drivers/base/bus.c
> index 5e75e1bce551..9e62d6009058 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/bus.c
> @@ -261,13 +261,20 @@ static ssize_t bind_store(struct device_driver *drv, const char *buf,
> const struct bus_type *bus = bus_get(drv->bus);
> struct device *dev;
> int err = -ENODEV;
> + int ret;
>
> dev = bus_find_device_by_name(bus, NULL, buf);
> - if (dev && driver_match_device(drv, dev)) {
> - err = device_driver_attach(drv, dev);
> - if (!err) {
> - /* success */
> - err = count;
> + if (dev) {
> + /* Protects against driver_set_override() races */
This comment isn't needed anymore.
> + device_lock(dev);
> + ret = driver_match_device(drv, dev);
> + device_unlock(dev);
> + if (ret) {
> + err = device_driver_attach(drv, dev);
> + if (!err) {
> + /* success */
> + err = count;
> + }
> }
> }
> put_device(dev);
> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
> index 13ab98e033ea..db60b4500136 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
> @@ -1170,7 +1170,10 @@ static int __driver_attach(struct device *dev, void *data)
> * is an error.
> */
>
> + /* Protects against driver_set_override() races */
Nor is this one.
Also, I looked again, and why are you not grabbing the lock in the
bind_store() sysfs call? driver_match_device() is only called in 3
places, 2 now have the lock held, and one does not. This feels wrong.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-27 9:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-26 16:00 [PATCH v2] driver core: fix use-after-free of driver_override via driver_match_device() Gui-Dong Han
2025-11-27 9:16 ` Greg KH [this message]
2025-11-27 15:00 ` Gui-Dong Han
2025-11-27 15:21 ` Greg KH
2026-01-13 2:27 ` Gui-Dong Han
2026-01-13 9:58 ` Danilo Krummrich
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=2025112726-directly-underfeed-fb07@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=baijiaju1990@gmail.com \
--cc=chenqiuji666@gmail.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=hanguidong02@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.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