From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Cc: <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<magnus.karlsson@intel.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>,
<pabeni@redhat.com>, <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
<jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 net 2/7] i40e: avoid null ptr dereference in i40e_ptp_stop()
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 19:22:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ak6HOhJh/pxdloEs@boxer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260708150455.1498611-2-horms@kernel.org>
On Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 04:04:56PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
> email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
> Full review at: https://sashiko.dev
> ---
> i40e: avoid null ptr dereference in i40e_ptp_stop()
>
> Check if main_vsi is not null before calling dev_info() to avoid a null
> pointer dereference when i40e_vsi_clear() frees the main VSI during rebuild.
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ptp.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ptp.c
> > index ff62b5f2c8150..ca93df4d67859 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ptp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ptp.c
> > @@ -1556,8 +1556,9 @@ void i40e_ptp_stop(struct i40e_pf *pf)
> > if (pf->ptp_clock) {
> > ptp_clock_unregister(pf->ptp_clock);
> > pf->ptp_clock = NULL;
> > - dev_info(&pf->pdev->dev, "%s: removed PHC on %s\n", __func__,
> > - main_vsi->netdev->name);
> > + if (main_vsi)
> > + dev_info(&pf->pdev->dev, "%s: removed PHC on %s\n", __func__,
> > + main_vsi->netdev->name);
>
> [Severity: High]
> This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but this lockless check appears
> to introduce a time-of-check to time-of-use race condition.
Thanks Simon I saw these, however since all of the issues are classified
as pre-existing issues IMHO these changes are okay to be taken and then
we could go with another round of fixes.
>
> When i40e_remove() calls i40e_ptp_stop(pf), it does so unsynchronized from
> the background i40e_rebuild() task. If i40e_rebuild() fails during setup, it
> calls i40e_vsi_clear(main_vsi), which frees the VSI and its netdev.
>
> If i40e_ptp_stop() caches main_vsi right before it is cleared, couldn't the
> if (main_vsi) check pass, but the subsequent main_vsi->netdev->name access
> dereference freed memory, causing a use-after-free?
>
> [Severity: High]
> This is another pre-existing issue, but I noticed that i40e_ptp_stop() doesn't
> seem to cancel the background workqueue task ptp_extts0_work.
>
> During device removal, i40e_remove() calls i40e_ptp_stop() and then
> subsequently frees the i40e_pf structure. If the work executes after the PF
> is freed, will it access the deallocated i40e_pf structure and trigger a
> use-after-free?
>
> [Severity: High]
> This is also a pre-existing issue, but I am looking at how pf->ptp_tx_skb is
> cleared earlier in i40e_ptp_stop(). The teardown uses I40E_FLAG_PTP_ENA as a
> gate guard:
>
> i40e_ptp_stop() clears I40E_FLAG_PTP_ENA, then locklessly checks and frees
> pf->ptp_tx_skb using dev_kfree_skb_any().
>
> The interrupt handler i40e_ptp_tx_hwtstamp() uses the same bit as a guard:
>
> if (!test_bit(I40E_FLAG_PTP_ENA, pf->flags))
> return;
>
> If the interrupt handler passes the test_bit check just before i40e_ptp_stop()
> executes clear_bit(), both contexts could concurrently read the same
> pf->ptp_tx_skb pointer into local variables before it is NULLed out. Could
> this result in a double free of the SKB?
>
> [Severity: High]
> There is a similar pre-existing issue related to the teardown of the
> timestamping state in i40e_ptp_stop() racing with the TX datapath.
>
> The TX datapath i40e_tstamp() protects the state using a bit lock:
>
> if (pf->ptp_tx &&
> !test_and_set_bit_lock(__I40E_PTP_TX_IN_PROGRESS, pf->state)) {
> ...
> pf->ptp_tx_skb = skb_get(skb);
> }
>
> However, i40e_ptp_stop() checks pf->ptp_tx_skb locklessly and only clears
> the bit lock if the SKB was present. If the TX datapath acquires the lock
> and is preempted right before assigning pf->ptp_tx_skb, i40e_ptp_stop()
> might execute, see a NULL ptp_tx_skb, and skip the cleanup block.
>
> When the TX datapath resumes, it assigns the SKB pointer. Since the device
> is subsequently destroyed, does this cause the SKB to be permanently leaked?
>
> > }
> >
> > if (i40e_is_ptp_pin_dev(&pf->hw)) {
>
> [Severity: High]
> This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but while reviewing the driver's
> cleanup paths, I noticed a potential leak in the i40e_probe() error handling:
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c:i40e_probe() {
> ...
> err_vsis:
> set_bit(__I40E_DOWN, pf->state);
> i40e_ptp_stop(pf);
> i40e_clear_interrupt_scheme(pf);
> kfree(pf->vsi);
> ...
> }
>
> If initialization fails after VSIs are successfully created, this cleanup
> path calls kfree(pf->vsi) which frees the pointer array, but does not appear
> to unregister the netdev or free the actual VSI structs and hardware rings.
>
> Could this leave an active, registered netdev with dangling pointers to the
> subsequently freed PF, potentially triggering a use-after-free upon network
> traffic or userspace access?
>
> [Severity: High]
> This is a pre-existing issue, but I noticed an ad-hoc locking pattern in
> i40e_remove():
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c:i40e_remove() {
> ...
> while (test_and_set_bit(__I40E_RESET_RECOVERY_PENDING, pf->state))
> usleep_range(1000, 2000);
> ...
> }
>
> This attempts to synchronize with the background reset path by spinning on
> a bit flag, which acts as a sleepable lock without the standard fairness or
> deadlock detection guarantees.
>
> Since this ad-hoc locking scheme fails to provide proper mutual exclusion
> earlier in the function, could this be the direct cause of why i40e_ptp_stop()
> executes unsynchronized from i40e_rebuild()? Should a proper mutex be used
> here instead?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-08 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-01 12:45 [PATCH v5 net 0/7] i40e: re-init and UAF fixes Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-01 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 net 1/7] i40e: unregister netdev before clearing VSI on reinit failure Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-07 13:35 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Loktionov, Aleksandr
2026-07-01 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 net 2/7] i40e: avoid null ptr dereference in i40e_ptp_stop() Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-07 13:36 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Loktionov, Aleksandr
2026-07-08 15:04 ` Simon Horman
2026-07-08 17:22 ` Maciej Fijalkowski [this message]
2026-07-08 18:31 ` Simon Horman
2026-07-01 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 net 3/7] i40e: make ring pointers unreachable before freeing via rcu Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-07 13:37 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Loktionov, Aleksandr
2026-07-01 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 net 4/7] i40e: avoid deadlock when calling unregister_netdev() Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-07 13:38 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Loktionov, Aleksandr
2026-07-01 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 net 5/7] i40e: fix potential UAF in i40e_vsi_setup()'s error path Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-01 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 net 6/7] i40e: do not expose netdev too early Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-01 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 net 7/7] i40e: keep q_vectors array in sync with channel count changes Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-07-08 8:51 ` [PATCH v5 net 0/7] i40e: re-init and UAF fixes Paolo Abeni
2026-07-08 10:14 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
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=ak6HOhJh/pxdloEs@boxer \
--to=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.karlsson@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.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