Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

odroidgo2-joypad: only flush once if an event occurred #399

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: odroidgoA-4.4.y
Choose a base branch
from
Open

odroidgo2-joypad: only flush once if an event occurred #399

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ghost
Copy link

@ghost ghost commented May 24, 2020

  • Call event_sync() at most once per poll event

This should be the default behavior according to the kernel documentation. This should also reduce some overhead of calling sync ever single poll.

- Call event_sync() at most once per poll event
mo123 pushed a commit to mo123/linux-4.19 that referenced this pull request Jun 16, 2022
[ Upstream commit 6c2e3bf ]

This patch fixes the following crash by receiving a invalid message:

[  160.672220] ==================================================================
[  160.676206] BUG: KASAN: user-memory-access in dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.679659] Read of size 8 at addr 00000000deadbeef by task kworker/u32:13/319
[  160.681447]
[  160.681824] CPU: 10 PID: 319 Comm: kworker/u32:13 Not tainted 5.14.0-rc2+ hardkernel#399
[  160.683472] Hardware name: Red Hat KVM/RHEL-AV, BIOS 1.14.0-1.module+el8.6.0+12648+6ede71a5 04/01/2014
[  160.685574] Workqueue: dlm_recv process_recv_sockets
[  160.686721] Call Trace:
[  160.687310]  dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x6f
[  160.688169]  ? dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.689116]  kasan_report.cold.14+0x116/0x11b
[  160.690138]  ? dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.690832]  dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.691502]  _receive_unlock_reply+0x103/0x170
[  160.692241]  _receive_message+0x11df/0x1ec0
[  160.692926]  ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0xa1/0xd0
[  160.693700]  ? rcu_read_lock_bh_held+0xb0/0xb0
[  160.694427]  ? lock_acquire+0x175/0x400
[  160.695058]  ? do_purge.isra.51+0x200/0x200
[  160.695744]  ? lock_acquired+0x360/0x5d0
[  160.696400]  ? lock_contended+0x6a0/0x6a0
[  160.697055]  ? lock_release+0x21d/0x5e0
[  160.697686]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xe0/0x110
[  160.698352]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xe0/0x110
[  160.699026]  ? ___might_sleep+0x1cc/0x1e0
[  160.699698]  ? dlm_wait_requestqueue+0x94/0x140
[  160.700451]  ? dlm_process_requestqueue+0x240/0x240
[  160.701249]  ? down_write_killable+0x2b0/0x2b0
[  160.701988]  ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0xa2/0x130
[  160.702690]  dlm_receive_buffer+0x1a5/0x210
[  160.703385]  dlm_process_incoming_buffer+0x726/0x9f0
[  160.704210]  receive_from_sock+0x1c0/0x3b0
[  160.704886]  ? dlm_tcp_shutdown+0x30/0x30
[  160.705561]  ? lock_acquire+0x175/0x400
[  160.706197]  ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0xa1/0xd0
[  160.706941]  ? rcu_read_lock_bh_held+0xb0/0xb0
[  160.707681]  process_recv_sockets+0x32/0x40
[  160.708366]  process_one_work+0x55e/0xad0
[  160.709045]  ? pwq_dec_nr_in_flight+0x110/0x110
[  160.709820]  worker_thread+0x65/0x5e0
[  160.710423]  ? process_one_work+0xad0/0xad0
[  160.711087]  kthread+0x1ed/0x220
[  160.711628]  ? set_kthread_struct+0x80/0x80
[  160.712314]  ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30

The issue is that we received a DLM message for a user lock but the
destination lock is a kernel lock. Note that the address which is trying
to derefence is 00000000deadbeef, which is in a kernel lock
lkb->lkb_astparam, this field should never be derefenced by the DLM
kernel stack. In case of a user lock lkb->lkb_astparam is lkb->lkb_ua
(memory is shared by a union field). The struct lkb_ua will be handled
by the DLM kernel stack but on a kernel lock it will contain invalid
data and ends in most likely crashing the kernel.

It can be reproduced with two cluster nodes.

node 2:
dlm_tool join test
echo "862 fooobaar 1 2 1" > /sys/kernel/debug/dlm/test_locks
echo "862 3 1" > /sys/kernel/debug/dlm/test_waiters

node 1:
dlm_tool join test

python:
foo = DLM(h_cmd=3, o_nextcmd=1, h_nodeid=1, h_lockspace=0x77222027, \
          m_type=7, m_flags=0x1, m_remid=0x862, m_result=0xFFFEFFFE)
newFile = open("/sys/kernel/debug/dlm/comms/2/rawmsg", "wb")
newFile.write(bytes(foo))

Signed-off-by: Alexander Aring <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
mdrjr pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2022
[ Upstream commit 6c2e3bf ]

This patch fixes the following crash by receiving a invalid message:

[  160.672220] ==================================================================
[  160.676206] BUG: KASAN: user-memory-access in dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.679659] Read of size 8 at addr 00000000deadbeef by task kworker/u32:13/319
[  160.681447]
[  160.681824] CPU: 10 PID: 319 Comm: kworker/u32:13 Not tainted 5.14.0-rc2+ #399
[  160.683472] Hardware name: Red Hat KVM/RHEL-AV, BIOS 1.14.0-1.module+el8.6.0+12648+6ede71a5 04/01/2014
[  160.685574] Workqueue: dlm_recv process_recv_sockets
[  160.686721] Call Trace:
[  160.687310]  dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x6f
[  160.688169]  ? dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.689116]  kasan_report.cold.14+0x116/0x11b
[  160.690138]  ? dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.690832]  dlm_user_add_ast+0xc3/0x370
[  160.691502]  _receive_unlock_reply+0x103/0x170
[  160.692241]  _receive_message+0x11df/0x1ec0
[  160.692926]  ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0xa1/0xd0
[  160.693700]  ? rcu_read_lock_bh_held+0xb0/0xb0
[  160.694427]  ? lock_acquire+0x175/0x400
[  160.695058]  ? do_purge.isra.51+0x200/0x200
[  160.695744]  ? lock_acquired+0x360/0x5d0
[  160.696400]  ? lock_contended+0x6a0/0x6a0
[  160.697055]  ? lock_release+0x21d/0x5e0
[  160.697686]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xe0/0x110
[  160.698352]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xe0/0x110
[  160.699026]  ? ___might_sleep+0x1cc/0x1e0
[  160.699698]  ? dlm_wait_requestqueue+0x94/0x140
[  160.700451]  ? dlm_process_requestqueue+0x240/0x240
[  160.701249]  ? down_write_killable+0x2b0/0x2b0
[  160.701988]  ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0xa2/0x130
[  160.702690]  dlm_receive_buffer+0x1a5/0x210
[  160.703385]  dlm_process_incoming_buffer+0x726/0x9f0
[  160.704210]  receive_from_sock+0x1c0/0x3b0
[  160.704886]  ? dlm_tcp_shutdown+0x30/0x30
[  160.705561]  ? lock_acquire+0x175/0x400
[  160.706197]  ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0xa1/0xd0
[  160.706941]  ? rcu_read_lock_bh_held+0xb0/0xb0
[  160.707681]  process_recv_sockets+0x32/0x40
[  160.708366]  process_one_work+0x55e/0xad0
[  160.709045]  ? pwq_dec_nr_in_flight+0x110/0x110
[  160.709820]  worker_thread+0x65/0x5e0
[  160.710423]  ? process_one_work+0xad0/0xad0
[  160.711087]  kthread+0x1ed/0x220
[  160.711628]  ? set_kthread_struct+0x80/0x80
[  160.712314]  ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30

The issue is that we received a DLM message for a user lock but the
destination lock is a kernel lock. Note that the address which is trying
to derefence is 00000000deadbeef, which is in a kernel lock
lkb->lkb_astparam, this field should never be derefenced by the DLM
kernel stack. In case of a user lock lkb->lkb_astparam is lkb->lkb_ua
(memory is shared by a union field). The struct lkb_ua will be handled
by the DLM kernel stack but on a kernel lock it will contain invalid
data and ends in most likely crashing the kernel.

It can be reproduced with two cluster nodes.

node 2:
dlm_tool join test
echo "862 fooobaar 1 2 1" > /sys/kernel/debug/dlm/test_locks
echo "862 3 1" > /sys/kernel/debug/dlm/test_waiters

node 1:
dlm_tool join test

python:
foo = DLM(h_cmd=3, o_nextcmd=1, h_nodeid=1, h_lockspace=0x77222027, \
          m_type=7, m_flags=0x1, m_remid=0x862, m_result=0xFFFEFFFE)
newFile = open("/sys/kernel/debug/dlm/comms/2/rawmsg", "wb")
newFile.write(bytes(foo))

Signed-off-by: Alexander Aring <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

0 participants