[PATCH] dpll: Add a check before kfree() to match the existing check before kmemdup()

[PATCH] dpll: Add a check before kfree() to match the existing check before kmemdup()

[Jiasheng Jiang]

When src->freq_supported is not NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0,
dst->freq_supported is equal to src->freq_supported.
In this case, if the subsequent kstrdup() fails, src->freq_supported may
be freed without being set to NULL, potentially leading to a
use-after-free or double-free error.

Fixes: 830ead5fb0c5 ("dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.8+
Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
index 32019dc33cca..7d147adf8455 100644
--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
@@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct dpll_pin_properties *src,
 err_panel_label:
 	kfree(dst->board_label);
 err_board_label:
-	kfree(dst->freq_supported);
+	if (src->freq_supported_num)
+		kfree(dst->freq_supported);
 	return -ENOMEM;
 }
 
-- 
2.25.1

RE: [PATCH] dpll: Add a check before kfree() to match the existing check before kmemdup()

[Kubalewski, Arkadiusz]

Hi Jiasheng, many thanks for the patch!

>From: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
>Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2025 9:17 PM
>
>When src->freq_supported is not NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0,
>dst->freq_supported is equal to src->freq_supported.
>In this case, if the subsequent kstrdup() fails, src->freq_supported may

The src->freq_supported is not being freed in this function,
you ment dst->freq_supported?
But also it is not true.
dst->freq_supported is being freed already, this patch adds only additional
condition over it..
From kfree doc: "If @object is NULL, no operation is performed.".

>be freed without being set to NULL, potentially leading to a
>use-after-free or double-free error.
>

kfree does not set to NULL from what I know. How would it lead to
use-after-free/double-free?
Why the one would use the memory after the function returns -ENOMEM?

I don't think this patch is needed or resolves anything.

Thank you!
Arkadiusz

>Fixes: 830ead5fb0c5 ("dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module")
>Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.8+
>Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
>---
> drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>index 32019dc33cca..7d147adf8455 100644
>--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>@@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct
>dpll_pin_properties *src,
> err_panel_label:
> 	kfree(dst->board_label);
> err_board_label:
>-	kfree(dst->freq_supported);
>+	if (src->freq_supported_num)
>+		kfree(dst->freq_supported);
> 	return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
>--
>2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] dpll: Add a check before kfree() to match the existing check before kmemdup()

[Jiri Pirko]

Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:31:27AM +0100, arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com wrote:
>Hi Jiasheng, many thanks for the patch!
>
>>From: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
>>Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2025 9:17 PM
>>
>>When src->freq_supported is not NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0,
>>dst->freq_supported is equal to src->freq_supported.
>>In this case, if the subsequent kstrdup() fails, src->freq_supported may
>
>The src->freq_supported is not being freed in this function,
>you ment dst->freq_supported?
>But also it is not true.
>dst->freq_supported is being freed already, this patch adds only additional
>condition over it..
>From kfree doc: "If @object is NULL, no operation is performed.".
>
>>be freed without being set to NULL, potentially leading to a
>>use-after-free or double-free error.
>>
>
>kfree does not set to NULL from what I know. How would it lead to
>use-after-free/double-free?
>Why the one would use the memory after the function returns -ENOMEM?
>
>I don't think this patch is needed or resolves anything.

I'm sure it's not needed.


>
>Thank you!
>Arkadiusz
>
>>Fixes: 830ead5fb0c5 ("dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module")
>>Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.8+
>>Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
>>---
>> drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>>diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>>index 32019dc33cca..7d147adf8455 100644
>>--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>>+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>>@@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct
>>dpll_pin_properties *src,
>> err_panel_label:
>> 	kfree(dst->board_label);
>> err_board_label:
>>-	kfree(dst->freq_supported);
>>+	if (src->freq_supported_num)
>>+		kfree(dst->freq_supported);
>> 	return -ENOMEM;
>> }
>>
>>--
>>2.25.1
>

Re: [PATCH] dpll: Add a check before kfree() to match the existing check before kmemdup()

[Jiasheng Jiang]

Hi Jiri,

On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 7:04 AM Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>
> Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:31:27AM +0100, arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com wrote:
> >Hi Jiasheng, many thanks for the patch!
> >
> >>From: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
> >>Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2025 9:17 PM
> >>
> >>When src->freq_supported is not NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0,
> >>dst->freq_supported is equal to src->freq_supported.
> >>In this case, if the subsequent kstrdup() fails, src->freq_supported may
> >
> >The src->freq_supported is not being freed in this function,
> >you ment dst->freq_supported?
> >But also it is not true.
> >dst->freq_supported is being freed already, this patch adds only additional
> >condition over it..
> >From kfree doc: "If @object is NULL, no operation is performed.".
> >
> >>be freed without being set to NULL, potentially leading to a
> >>use-after-free or double-free error.
> >>
> >
> >kfree does not set to NULL from what I know. How would it lead to
> >use-after-free/double-free?
> >Why the one would use the memory after the function returns -ENOMEM?
> >
> >I don't think this patch is needed or resolves anything.
>
> I'm sure it's not needed.
>

After "memcpy(dst, src, sizeof(*dst))", dst->freq_supported will point
to the same memory as src->freq_supported.
When src->freq_supported is not NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0,
dst->freq_supported still points to the same memory as src->freq_supported.
Then, if the subsequent kstrdup() fails, dst->freq_supported is freed,
and src->freq_supported becomes a Dangling Pointer,
potentially leading to a use-after-free or double-free error.

-Jiasheng

> >
> >Thank you!
> >Arkadiusz
> >
> >>Fixes: 830ead5fb0c5 ("dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module")
> >>Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.8+
> >>Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
> >>---
> >> drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> >>index 32019dc33cca..7d147adf8455 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> >>@@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct
> >>dpll_pin_properties *src,
> >> err_panel_label:
> >>      kfree(dst->board_label);
> >> err_board_label:
> >>-     kfree(dst->freq_supported);
> >>+     if (src->freq_supported_num)
> >>+             kfree(dst->freq_supported);
> >>      return -ENOMEM;
> >> }
> >>
> >>--
> >>2.25.1
> >

Re: [PATCH] dpll: Add a check before kfree() to match the existing check before kmemdup()

[Jiri Pirko]

Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 05:47:04PM +0100, jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com wrote:
>Hi Jiri,
>
>On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 7:04 AM Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>>
>> Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:31:27AM +0100, arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com wrote:
>> >Hi Jiasheng, many thanks for the patch!
>> >
>> >>From: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
>> >>Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2025 9:17 PM
>> >>
>> >>When src->freq_supported is not NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0,
>> >>dst->freq_supported is equal to src->freq_supported.
>> >>In this case, if the subsequent kstrdup() fails, src->freq_supported may
>> >
>> >The src->freq_supported is not being freed in this function,
>> >you ment dst->freq_supported?
>> >But also it is not true.
>> >dst->freq_supported is being freed already, this patch adds only additional
>> >condition over it..
>> >From kfree doc: "If @object is NULL, no operation is performed.".
>> >
>> >>be freed without being set to NULL, potentially leading to a
>> >>use-after-free or double-free error.
>> >>
>> >
>> >kfree does not set to NULL from what I know. How would it lead to
>> >use-after-free/double-free?
>> >Why the one would use the memory after the function returns -ENOMEM?
>> >
>> >I don't think this patch is needed or resolves anything.
>>
>> I'm sure it's not needed.
>>
>
>After "memcpy(dst, src, sizeof(*dst))", dst->freq_supported will point
>to the same memory as src->freq_supported.
>When src->freq_supported is not NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0,
>dst->freq_supported still points to the same memory as src->freq_supported.
>Then, if the subsequent kstrdup() fails, dst->freq_supported is freed,
>and src->freq_supported becomes a Dangling Pointer,
>potentially leading to a use-after-free or double-free error.

Okay. This condition should not happen, driver is broken in that case.
Better add an assertion for it.


>
>-Jiasheng
>
>> >
>> >Thank you!
>> >Arkadiusz
>> >
>> >>Fixes: 830ead5fb0c5 ("dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module")
>> >>Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.8+
>> >>Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
>> >>---
>> >> drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
>> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >>
>> >>diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>> >>index 32019dc33cca..7d147adf8455 100644
>> >>--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>> >>+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>> >>@@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct
>> >>dpll_pin_properties *src,
>> >> err_panel_label:
>> >>      kfree(dst->board_label);
>> >> err_board_label:
>> >>-     kfree(dst->freq_supported);
>> >>+     if (src->freq_supported_num)
>> >>+             kfree(dst->freq_supported);
>> >>      return -ENOMEM;
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >>--
>> >>2.25.1
>> >

[PATCH v2] dpll: Add an assertion to check freq_supported_num

[Jiasheng Jiang]

Since the driver is broken in the case that src->freq_supported is not
NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0, add an assertion for it.

Fixes: 830ead5fb0c5 ("dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.8+
Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
---
Changelog:

v1 -> v2:

1. Replace the check with an assertion.
---
 drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
index 32019dc33cca..3296776c1ebb 100644
--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
@@ -443,8 +443,9 @@ static void dpll_pin_prop_free(struct dpll_pin_properties *prop)
 static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct dpll_pin_properties *src,
 			     struct dpll_pin_properties *dst)
 {
+	BUG_ON(src->freq_supported && !src->freq_supported_num);
 	memcpy(dst, src, sizeof(*dst));
-	if (src->freq_supported && src->freq_supported_num) {
+	if (src->freq_supported) {
 		size_t freq_size = src->freq_supported_num *
 				   sizeof(*src->freq_supported);
 		dst->freq_supported = kmemdup(src->freq_supported,
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v2] dpll: Add an assertion to check freq_supported_num

[Jiri Pirko]

Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 04:09:30AM +0100, jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com wrote:
>Since the driver is broken in the case that src->freq_supported is not
>NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0, add an assertion for it.
>
>Fixes: 830ead5fb0c5 ("dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module")

It's not a real bug in current kernel. I don't think it's worth "fixes"
line and -net tree. I think it should be just sent to -net-next.


>Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.8+
>Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
>---
>Changelog:
>
>v1 -> v2:
>
>1. Replace the check with an assertion.
>---
> drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>index 32019dc33cca..3296776c1ebb 100644
>--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>@@ -443,8 +443,9 @@ static void dpll_pin_prop_free(struct dpll_pin_properties *prop)
> static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct dpll_pin_properties *src,
> 			     struct dpll_pin_properties *dst)
> {
>+	BUG_ON(src->freq_supported && !src->freq_supported_num);

Warnon-return please.


> 	memcpy(dst, src, sizeof(*dst));
>-	if (src->freq_supported && src->freq_supported_num) {
>+	if (src->freq_supported) {
> 		size_t freq_size = src->freq_supported_num *
> 				   sizeof(*src->freq_supported);
> 		dst->freq_supported = kmemdup(src->freq_supported,
>-- 
>2.25.1
>

[PATCH v3 net-next] dpll: Add an assertion to check freq_supported_num

[Jiasheng Jiang]

Since the driver is broken in the case that src->freq_supported is not
NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0, add an assertion for it.

Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
---
Changelog:

v2 -> v3:

1. Add "net-next" to the subject.
2. Remove the "Fixes" tag and "Cc: stable".
3. Replace BUG_ON with WARN_ON.

v1 -> v2:

1. Replace the check with an assertion.
---
 drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
index 32019dc33cca..0927eddbd417 100644
--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
@@ -443,8 +443,9 @@ static void dpll_pin_prop_free(struct dpll_pin_properties *prop)
 static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct dpll_pin_properties *src,
 			     struct dpll_pin_properties *dst)
 {
+	WARN_ON(src->freq_supported && !src->freq_supported_num);
 	memcpy(dst, src, sizeof(*dst));
-	if (src->freq_supported && src->freq_supported_num) {
+	if (src->freq_supported) {
 		size_t freq_size = src->freq_supported_num *
 				   sizeof(*src->freq_supported);
 		dst->freq_supported = kmemdup(src->freq_supported,
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] dpll: Add an assertion to check freq_supported_num

[kernel test robot]

Hi,

Thanks for your patch.

FYI: kernel test robot notices the stable kernel rule is not satisfied.

The check is based on https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html#option-1

Rule: add the tag "Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org" in the sign-off area to have the patch automatically included in the stable tree.
Subject: [PATCH v3 net-next] dpll: Add an assertion to check freq_supported_num
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20250226193715.23898-1-jiashengjiangcool%40gmail.com

-- 
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] dpll: Add an assertion to check freq_supported_num

[Przemek Kitszel]

On 2/26/25 20:37, Jiasheng Jiang wrote:
> Since the driver is broken in the case that src->freq_supported is not
> NULL but src->freq_supported_num is 0, add an assertion for it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiashengjiangcool@gmail.com>
> ---
> Changelog:
> 
> v2 -> v3:

please post next revision as a separate thread instead of
in-reply-to the previous one

please also do wait a minimum of 24h prior to submitting a new
revision

> 
> 1. Add "net-next" to the subject.
> 2. Remove the "Fixes" tag and "Cc: stable".
> 3. Replace BUG_ON with WARN_ON.
> 
> v1 -> v2:
> 
> 1. Replace the check with an assertion.
> ---
>   drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 3 ++-
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> index 32019dc33cca..0927eddbd417 100644
> --- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> @@ -443,8 +443,9 @@ static void dpll_pin_prop_free(struct dpll_pin_properties *prop)
>   static int dpll_pin_prop_dup(const struct dpll_pin_properties *src,
>   			     struct dpll_pin_properties *dst)
>   {
> +	WARN_ON(src->freq_supported && !src->freq_supported_num);

Jiri has asked for an early return too

>   	memcpy(dst, src, sizeof(*dst));
> -	if (src->freq_supported && src->freq_supported_num) {
> +	if (src->freq_supported) {
>   		size_t freq_size = src->freq_supported_num *
>   				   sizeof(*src->freq_supported);
>   		dst->freq_supported = kmemdup(src->freq_supported,