Re: [PATCH 5/5] KVM: arm64: vgic: Reject out-of-range GICv5 PPI IDs
Sascha Bischoff <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.kvmarm,dev.linux.lists.sashiko-reviews,org.kernel.vger.kvm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, 2026-08-10 at 11:16 +0000, [email protected] wrote: > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential > issue(s) to consider: > - [Critical] Returning NULL for out-of-range GICv5 PPIs causes a > deterministic host kernel panic via NULL pointer dereference or > BUG_ON() during timer initialization with user-controlled inputs. > -- > > --- Patch [5]: [PATCH 5/5] KVM: arm64: vgic: Reject out-of-range > GICv5 PPI IDs --- > commit b745364de86ed8f379d9297c2d334e7a734654d6 > Author: Sascha Bischoff <[email protected]> > > KVM: arm64: vgic: Reject out-of-range GICv5 PPI IDs > > The commit prevents KVM from clamping out-of-range GICv5 PPIs to > index 0. > It introduces a check in vgic_get_vcpu_irq() that returns NULL when > the > extracted hardware IRQ ID exceeds the supported range. > > Link: > https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=27 > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c > > b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c > > index 3077cfdaa146d..d0c91f0c52698 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c > > @@ -118,6 +118,8 @@ struct vgic_irq *vgic_get_vcpu_irq(struct > > kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 intid) > > switch (type) { > > case KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_VGIC_V5: > > intid = vgic_v5_get_hwirq_id(intid); > > + if (intid >= VGIC_V5_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS) > > + return NULL; > > [Severity: Critical] > Does returning NULL here allow a malicious userspace process to > trigger a host > kernel panic? We already return NULL on the other paths so this is consistent behaviour. However, the following is definitely an issue, albeit not with the generic vgic code. > > If a user configures a VM and sets the timer IRQ to an out-of-bounds > GICv5 PPI > ID (>= 64) via the KVM_SET_DEVICE_ATTR ioctl, the input is validated > using > irq_is_ppi(). Because irq_is_ppi() only checks the upper type bits > for GICv5, > it accepts the invalid ID and stores it. > > When the vCPU is subsequently run, kvm_timer_enable() initializes the > timers > and calls functions like kvm_vgic_set_owner() and > kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq() with > the out-of-bounds IRQ. These callers lack NULL checks and assume the > returned > pointer is valid. > > For example, kvm_vgic_set_owner() unconditionally dereferences it: > > arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c:kvm_vgic_set_owner() { > irq = vgic_get_vcpu_irq(vcpu, intid); > raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags); > ... > } > > And kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq() explicitly asserts it with BUG_ON(): > > arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c:kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq() { > struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_vcpu_irq(vcpu, vintid); > ... > BUG_ON(!irq); > ... > } > > Should the boundary check be enforced earlier, such as during the > ioctl > validation itself, to prevent storing the invalid ID and crashing > during > timer initialization? We should fix both issues, and shouldn't work around an arch timer issue in the common vgic code. I've added a check to the irq_is_ppi() helper that check that the ID is valid for GICv5. This is safer and more consistent with what was done for GICv2/3. I've had a closer look at this and can confirm that the arch timer code has a bug with GICv5 where we look up a potentially invalid IRQ, then pass the NULL pointer to kvm_vgic_set_owner(), which then tries to dereference it. I'd added another patch to v2 of this series to first check the PPI is correct and only then try and set the owner. > > > intid = array_index_nospec(intid, > > VGIC_V5_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS); > > break; > > default: > Thanks, Sascha