From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@huawei.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] static_call: Handle module init failure correctly in static_call_del_module()
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2024 00:58:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87msko739v.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y1487bh2.ffs@tglx>
Module insertion invokes static_call_add_module() to initialize the static
calls in a module. static_call_add_module() invokes __static_call_init(),
which allocates a struct static_call_mod to either encapsulate the built-in
static call sites of the associated key into it so further modules can be
added or to append the module to the module chain.
If that allocation fails the function returns with an error code and the
module core invokes static_call_del_module() to clean up eventually added
static_call_mod entries.
This works correctly, when all keys used by the module were converted over
to a module chain before the failure. If not then static_call_del_module()
causes a #GP as it blindly assumes that key::mods points to a valid struct
static_call_mod.
The problem is that key::mods is not a individual struct member of struct
static_call_key, it's part of a union to save space:
union {
/* bit 0: 0 = mods, 1 = sites */
unsigned long type;
struct static_call_mod *mods;
struct static_call_site *sites;
};
key::sites is a pointer to the list of built-in usage sites of the static
call. The type of the pointer is differentiated by bit 0. A mods pointer
has the bit clear, the sites pointer has the bit set.
As static_call_del_module() blindly assumes that the pointer is a valid
static_call_mod type, it fails to check for this failure case and
dereferences the pointer to the list of built-in call sites, which is
obviously bogus.
Cure it by checking whether the key has a sites or a mods pointer.
If it is a sites pointer then the key is not to be touched. As the sites
are walked in the same order as in __static_call_init() the site walk
can be terminated because all subsequent sites have not been touched by
the init code due to the error exit.
If it was converted before the allocation fail, then the inner loop which
searches for a module match will find nothing.
A fail in the second allocation in __static_call_init() is harmless and
does not require special treatment. The first allocation succeeded and
converted the key to a module chain. That first entry has mod::mod == NULL
and mod::next == NULL, so the inner loop of static_call_del_module() will
neither find a module match nor a module chain. The next site in the walk
was either already converted, but can't match the module, or it will exit
the outer loop because it has a static_call_site pointer and not a
static_call_mod pointer.
Fixes: 9183c3f9ed71 ("static_call: Add inline static call infrastructure")
Reported-by: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230915082126.4187913-1-ruanjinjie@huawei.com
---
kernel/static_call_inline.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
--- a/kernel/static_call_inline.c
+++ b/kernel/static_call_inline.c
@@ -411,6 +411,17 @@ static void static_call_del_module(struc
for (site = start; site < stop; site++) {
key = static_call_key(site);
+
+ /*
+ * If the key was not updated due to a memory allocation
+ * failure in __static_call_init() then treating key::sites
+ * as key::mods in the code below would cause random memory
+ * access and #GP. In that case all subsequent sites have
+ * not been touched either, so stop iterating.
+ */
+ if (static_call_key_sites(key))
+ break;
+
if (key == prev_key)
continue;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-03 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-15 8:21 [PATCH] static_call: Fix a wild-memory-access bug in static_call_del_module() Jinjie Ruan
2023-09-15 9:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-09-02 12:01 ` Jinjie Ruan
2024-09-02 12:06 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-02 12:07 ` Jinjie Ruan
2024-09-02 12:14 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-03 20:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-03 22:58 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2024-09-04 3:32 ` [PATCH] static_call: Handle module init failure correctly " Jinjie Ruan
2024-09-04 7:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-04 8:00 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-04 8:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-09-04 9:08 ` [PATCH] static_call: Replace pointless WARN_ON() in static_call_module_notify() Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-06 14:41 ` [tip: locking/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-04 8:03 ` [PATCH] static_call: Handle module init failure correctly in static_call_del_module() Jinjie Ruan
2024-09-04 8:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-04 9:50 ` Jinjie Ruan
2024-09-05 3:34 ` Jinjie Ruan
2024-09-05 9:44 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-06 23:24 ` Luis Chamberlain
2024-09-19 9:53 ` Luis Chamberlain
2024-09-24 7:22 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-11-08 8:12 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-11-08 15:49 ` Luis Chamberlain
2024-11-08 16:09 ` Daniel Gomez
2024-11-08 16:22 ` Daniel Gomez
2024-09-04 9:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Thomas Gleixner
2024-09-04 9:19 ` Jinjie Ruan
2024-09-06 14:41 ` [tip: locking/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
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=87msko739v.ffs@tglx \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ruanjinjie@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