Re: [PATCH net v7 3/7] net: mana: free HWC comp_buf after destroying the EQ

[email protected]
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-hyperv
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Incomplete Fix / Use-After-Free of WQ structures due to incorrect channel teardown order.
- [High] Stack Memory Corruption and Logic Error due to missing reinitialization after request timeout.
- [High] Hardware DMA Use-After-Free when channel establishment times out.
--

--- Patch [3]: [PATCH net v7 3/7] net: mana: free HWC comp_buf after destroying the EQ ---
commit 6875abc2fe553564a7ca5aa77824fb5ca62feda6
Author: Long Li <[email protected]>

net: mana: free HWC comp_buf after destroying the EQ

mana_hwc_destroy_cq() freed comp_buf and the CQ before the EQ. While the
EQ was still registered its handler could reach comp_buf and the CQ, so
a late EQE could touch freed memory. This commit fixes the teardown order.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c
> index ccef9bf9c6bfd..7e01596df11b6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/hw_channel.c
> @@ -384,14 +384,17 @@ static void mana_hwc_comp_event(void *ctx, struct gdma_queue *q_self)
>  
>  static void mana_hwc_destroy_cq(struct gdma_context *gc, struct hwc_cq *hwc_cq)
>  {
> -	kfree(hwc_cq->comp_buf);
> +	/* Destroy the EQ first: it deregisters the IRQ and drains in-flight
> +	 * handlers, so none can touch the CQ after it is freed.
> +	 */
> +	if (hwc_cq->gdma_eq)
> +		mana_gd_destroy_queue(gc, hwc_cq->gdma_eq);
>  
> +	/* Safe to free now that the EQ handler is fenced. */
>  	if (hwc_cq->gdma_cq)
>  		mana_gd_destroy_queue(gc, hwc_cq->gdma_cq);
>  
> -	if (hwc_cq->gdma_eq)
> -		mana_gd_destroy_queue(gc, hwc_cq->gdma_eq);
> -
> +	kfree(hwc_cq->comp_buf);
>  	kfree(hwc_cq);
>  }

[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does the teardown order in
mana_hwc_destroy_channel() leave a use-after-free for the WQ structures?

In mana_hwc_destroy_channel(), the txq and rxq wrappers are destroyed
before mana_hwc_destroy_cq() fences the EQ:

mana_hwc_destroy_channel() {
    ...
    if (hwc->txq)
        mana_hwc_destroy_wq(hwc, hwc->txq);
        
    if (hwc->rxq)
        mana_hwc_destroy_wq(hwc, hwc->rxq);
        
    if (hwc->cq)
        mana_hwc_destroy_cq(hwc->gdma_dev->gdma_context, hwc->cq);
    ...
}

Since mana_hwc_destroy_wq() frees the wq structure, can an unfenced EQ 
handler dereference the freed hwc->rxq pointer in 
mana_hwc_rx_event_handler() while the EQ is still active?

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does mana_hwc_send_request() have a stack
corruption bug if a request times out?

If wait_for_completion_timeout() times out, the function jumps to out and 
releases the msg_id:

mana_hwc_send_request() {
    ...
    if (!wait_for_completion_timeout(&ctx->comp_event, ...)) {
        err = -ETIMEDOUT;
        goto out;
    }
    ...
}

A new request could then allocate the same msg_id without reinitializing
ctx->comp_event. If a late response arrives for the original request, 
mana_hwc_handle_resp() will copy the stale payload into the new caller's 
stack buffer and complete the event:

mana_hwc_handle_resp() {
    ...
    memcpy(ctx->output_buf, resp_msg, resp_len);
out:
    ctx->error = err;
    ...
    complete(&ctx->comp_event);
}

Could this cause the new request to receive stale data and continue 
prematurely?

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does a timeout during channel 
establishment result in a DMA use-after-free?

In mana_hwc_establish_channel(), if the hardware takes too long to reply:

mana_hwc_establish_channel() {
    ...
    if (!wait_for_completion_timeout(&hwc->hwc_init_eqe_comp, 60 * HZ))
        return -ETIMEDOUT;
    ...
}

The error path calls mana_hwc_destroy_channel(), which checks max_num_cqs
before tearing down the hardware channel:

mana_hwc_destroy_channel() {
    ...
    if (gc->max_num_cqs > 0)
        mana_smc_teardown_hwc(&gc->shm_channel, false);
    ...
}

Since max_num_cqs remains 0 during an init timeout, mana_smc_teardown_hwc() 
is skipped. Are the DMA buffers then freed while the hardware channel is 
still active and capable of writing to them?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=3
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.