[PATCH] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Handle errors from vgic_add_lpi
Christoffer Dall
christoffer.dall at linaro.org
Tue Aug 2 12:49:30 PDT 2016
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 04:18:46PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 02/08/16 16:08, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:35:27AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> On 01/08/16 19:29, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> >>> During low memory conditions, we could be dereferencing a NULL pointer
> >>> when vgic_add_lpi fails to allocate memory.
> >>>
> >>> Consider for example this call sequence:
> >>>
> >>> vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi
> >>> itte->irq = vgic_add_lpi(kvm, lpi_nr);
> >>> update_lpi_config(kvm, itte->irq, NULL);
> >>> ret = kvm_read_guest(kvm, propbase + irq->intid
> >>> ^^^^
> >>> kaboom?
> >>>
> >>> Instead, return an error pointer from vgic_add_lpi and check the return
> >>> value from its single caller.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall at linaro.org>
> >>> ---
> >>> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> >>> index 07411cf..3515bdb 100644
> >>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> >>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> >>> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid)
> >>>
> >>> irq = kzalloc(sizeof(struct vgic_irq), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>> if (!irq)
> >>> - return NULL;
> >>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> >>>
> >>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&irq->lpi_list);
> >>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&irq->ap_list);
> >>> @@ -697,24 +697,33 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>> struct its_device *device;
> >>> struct its_collection *collection, *new_coll = NULL;
> >>> int lpi_nr;
> >>> -
> >>> - device = find_its_device(its, device_id);
> >>> - if (!device)
> >>> - return E_ITS_MAPTI_UNMAPPED_DEVICE;
> >>> + struct vgic_irq *irq = NULL;
> >>> + int err = 0;
> >>>
> >>> if (its_cmd_get_command(its_cmd) == GITS_CMD_MAPTI)
> >>> lpi_nr = its_cmd_get_physical_id(its_cmd);
> >>> else
> >>> lpi_nr = event_id;
> >>> +
> >>> if (lpi_nr < GIC_LPI_OFFSET ||
> >>> lpi_nr >= max_lpis_propbaser(kvm->arch.vgic.propbaser))
> >>> return E_ITS_MAPTI_PHYSICALID_OOR;
> >>>
> >>> + irq = vgic_add_lpi(kvm, lpi_nr);
> >>> + if (IS_ERR(irq))
> >>> + return PTR_ERR(irq);
> >>> +
> >>> + device = find_its_device(its, device_id);
> >>> + if (!device) {
> >>> + err = E_ITS_MAPTI_UNMAPPED_DEVICE;
> >>> + goto out;
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> collection = find_collection(its, coll_id);
> >>> if (!collection) {
> >>> - int ret = vgic_its_alloc_collection(its, &collection, coll_id);
> >>> - if (ret)
> >>> - return ret;
> >>> + err = vgic_its_alloc_collection(its, &collection, coll_id);
> >>> + if (err)
> >>> + goto out;
> >>> new_coll = collection;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> @@ -722,9 +731,8 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>> if (!itte) {
> >>> itte = kzalloc(sizeof(struct its_itte), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>> if (!itte) {
> >>> - if (new_coll)
> >>> - vgic_its_free_collection(its, coll_id);
> >>> - return -ENOMEM;
> >>> + err = -ENOMEM;
> >>> + goto out;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> itte->event_id = event_id;
> >>> @@ -733,7 +741,8 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>>
> >>> itte->collection = collection;
> >>> itte->lpi = lpi_nr;
> >>> - itte->irq = vgic_add_lpi(kvm, lpi_nr);
> >>> + vgic_get_irq_kref(irq);
> >>> + itte->irq = irq;
> >>> update_affinity_itte(kvm, itte);
> >>>
> >>> /*
> >>> @@ -742,8 +751,15 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>> * the respective config data from memory here upon mapping the LPI.
> >>> */
> >>> update_lpi_config(kvm, itte->irq, NULL);
> >>> + new_coll = NULL;
> >>> + irq = NULL;
> >>>
> >>> - return 0;
> >>> +out:
> >>> + if (new_coll)
> >>> + vgic_its_free_collection(its, coll_id);
> >>> + if (irq)
> >>> + vgic_put_irq(kvm, irq);
> >>
> >> Ah, it took me a moment to understand why you had the
> >> vgic_irq_get_kref() above. Maybe a small comment?
> >>
> >
> > actually, now I'm confused.
> >
> > vgic_add_lpi returns a struct vgic_irq with a reference count for the
> > reference in the itte struct, right?
>
> It either returns a vgic_irq with a refcount set to 1 (freshly
> allocated), or a previously allocated one with the refcount already
> incremented.
>
> > So we never get a reference for the irq->lpi_list/dist->lpi_list_head ?
>
> I don't think so. being part of the lpi_list is a part of the LPI
> "existence".
hmm, ok, but since we're not holding the lock while decrementing the ref
count(only after we evaluate kref_put) it looks to me like you can end
up with a reference to a freed structure.
Basically, I think we need this:
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
index e7aeac7..fb8c0ab 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
@@ -117,22 +117,22 @@ static void vgic_irq_release(struct kref *ref)
void vgic_put_irq(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
{
- struct vgic_dist *dist;
+ struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
if (irq->intid < VGIC_MIN_LPI)
return;
- if (!kref_put(&irq->refcount, vgic_irq_release))
- return;
-
- dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
-
spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
- list_del(&irq->lpi_list);
- dist->lpi_list_count--;
- spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ if (!kref_put(&irq->refcount, vgic_irq_release)) {
+ spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ return;
+ } else {
+ list_del(&irq->lpi_list);
+ dist->lpi_list_count--;
+ spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
- kfree(irq);
+ kfree(irq);
+ }
}
/**
Thoughts?
>
> > In which case my code above is wrong and I should not be getting the
> > extra reference. Right?
>
> Ah, I just noticed that you are nullifying "irq". Either you don't
> nullify it (and keep the kref_get), or remove both kref_get/kref_put,
> but that makes your error handling a bit mot complicated.
>
I'll rewrite this patch.
> > Now, this made me think of another issue. vgic_add_lpi has a blurb in
> > there about racing with another vgic_add_lpi and then it returns an irq
> > with an additional reference. But I don't understand how this can
> > happen, given that the function only has a single caller which has to
> > run with a mutex held???
>
> The mutex is per-ITS, and you can have several ITSs mapping the same LPI
> (provided that they are generated by the same devid/evid).
>
> > Can two different itte's point to the same struct vgic_irq ?
>
> Definitely, if they are on different ITSs.
>
> Does it help?
>
Yes, this helps, and gives meaning to the comment in the function.
Thanks!
-Christoffer
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list