From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] x86/cpufreq: Avoid using processor_pminfo[cpu] when it is NULL
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 11:35:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1470998119-14965-2-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1470998119-14965-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
The undefined behaviour sanitiser shows that it really is NULL via the
pre_initcall path.
(XEN) ================================================================================
(XEN) UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in cpufreq.c:158:66
(XEN) member access within null pointer of type 'struct processor_pminfo'
(XEN) ----[ Xen-4.8-unstable x86_64 debug=y Not tainted ]----
<snip>
(XEN) [<ffff82d0801c4231>] cpufreq_add_cpu+0x161/0xdc0
(XEN) [<ffff82d0801c6610>] cpufreq.c#cpu_callback+0x20/0x30
(XEN) [<ffff82d0804eefad>] cpufreq.c#cpufreq_presmp_init+0x2d/0x50
(XEN) [<ffff82d0804c5942>] do_presmp_initcalls+0x22/0x30
(XEN) [<ffff82d08051852d>] __start_xen+0x378d/0x42f0
(XEN) [<ffff82d080100073>] __high_start+0x53/0x60
Fix two other occurances of the same buggy logic.
The processor_pminfo[] objects are only allocated as a result of
XENPF_set_processor_pminfo hypercalls, which means that this early cpu
callback will always hit the early NULL check, and is therefore pointless.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
---
CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
---
xen/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/xen/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index f19b403..fd82ef5 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ int __init cpufreq_register_governor(struct cpufreq_governor *governor)
int cpufreq_limit_change(unsigned int cpu)
{
- struct processor_performance *perf = &processor_pminfo[cpu]->perf;
+ struct processor_performance *perf;
struct cpufreq_policy *data;
struct cpufreq_policy policy;
@@ -134,6 +134,8 @@ int cpufreq_limit_change(unsigned int cpu)
!processor_pminfo[cpu])
return -ENODEV;
+ perf = &processor_pminfo[cpu]->perf;
+
if (perf->platform_limit >= perf->state_count)
return -EINVAL;
@@ -155,12 +157,15 @@ int cpufreq_add_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
struct cpufreq_dom *cpufreq_dom = NULL;
struct cpufreq_policy new_policy;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
- struct processor_performance *perf = &processor_pminfo[cpu]->perf;
+ struct processor_performance *perf;
/* to protect the case when Px was not controlled by xen */
- if (!processor_pminfo[cpu] ||
- !(perf->init & XEN_PX_INIT) ||
- !cpu_online(cpu))
+ if ( !processor_pminfo[cpu] || !cpu_online(cpu) )
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ perf = &processor_pminfo[cpu]->perf;
+
+ if ( !(perf->init & XEN_PX_INIT) )
return -EINVAL;
if (!cpufreq_driver)
@@ -310,12 +315,15 @@ int cpufreq_del_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
struct list_head *pos;
struct cpufreq_dom *cpufreq_dom = NULL;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
- struct processor_performance *perf = &processor_pminfo[cpu]->perf;
+ struct processor_performance *perf;
/* to protect the case when Px was not controlled by xen */
- if (!processor_pminfo[cpu] ||
- !(perf->init & XEN_PX_INIT) ||
- !cpu_online(cpu))
+ if ( !processor_pminfo[cpu] || !cpu_online(cpu) )
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ perf = &processor_pminfo[cpu]->perf;
+
+ if ( !(perf->init & XEN_PX_INIT) )
return -EINVAL;
if (!per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_policy, cpu))
@@ -637,8 +645,6 @@ static struct notifier_block cpu_nfb = {
static int __init cpufreq_presmp_init(void)
{
- void *cpu = (void *)(long)smp_processor_id();
- cpu_callback(&cpu_nfb, CPU_ONLINE, cpu);
register_cpu_notifier(&cpu_nfb);
return 0;
}
--
2.1.4
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-12 10:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-12 10:35 [PATCH 1/2] x86/boot: Align e820 and video data in the boot trampoline Andrew Cooper
2016-08-12 10:35 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2016-08-12 12:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/cpufreq: Avoid using processor_pminfo[cpu] when it is NULL Jan Beulich
2016-08-12 12:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/boot: Align e820 and video data in the boot trampoline Jan Beulich
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=1470998119-14965-2-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).