Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 2 Mar 2020 13:23:06 -0800
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>,
        Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vt: vt_ioctl: fix VT_DISALLOCATE freeing in-use virtual
 console
Message-ID: <20200302212306.GA78660@gmail.com>
References: <0000000000006663de0598d25ab1@google.com>
 <20200224071247.283098-1-ebiggers@kernel.org>
 <8fb00b38-abd0-6895-3ad2-85a6f05ee6cf@suse.com>
 <20200224081913.GA299238@sol.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200224081913.GA299238@sol.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 12:19:13AM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 09:04:33AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > > KASAN report:
> > > 	BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in con_shutdown+0x76/0x80 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:3278
> > > 	Write of size 8 at addr ffff88806a4ec108 by task syz_vt/129
> > > 
> > > 	CPU: 0 PID: 129 Comm: syz_vt Not tainted 5.6.0-rc2 #11
> > > 	Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS ?-20191223_100556-anatol 04/01/2014
> > > 	Call Trace:
> > > 	 [...]
> > > 	 con_shutdown+0x76/0x80 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:3278
> > > 	 release_tty+0xa8/0x410 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1514
> > > 	 tty_release_struct+0x34/0x50 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1629
> > > 	 tty_release+0x984/0xed0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1789
> > > 	 [...]
> > > 
> > > 	Allocated by task 129:
> > > 	 [...]
> > > 	 kzalloc include/linux/slab.h:669 [inline]
> > > 	 vc_allocate drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:1085 [inline]
> > > 	 vc_allocate+0x1ac/0x680 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:1066
> > > 	 con_install+0x4d/0x3f0 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:3229
> > > 	 tty_driver_install_tty drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1228 [inline]
> > > 	 tty_init_dev+0x94/0x350 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1341
> > > 	 tty_open_by_driver drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1987 [inline]
> > > 	 tty_open+0x3ca/0xb30 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2035
> > > 	 [...]
> > > 
> > > 	Freed by task 130:
> > > 	 [...]
> > > 	 kfree+0xbf/0x1e0 mm/slab.c:3757
> > > 	 vt_disallocate drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c:300 [inline]
> > > 	 vt_ioctl+0x16dc/0x1e30 drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c:818
> > > 	 tty_ioctl+0x9db/0x11b0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2660
> > 
> > That means the associated tty_port is destroyed while the tty layer
> > still has a tty on the top of it. That is a BUG anyway.
> > 
> > > Fixes: 4001d7b7fc27 ("vt: push down the tty lock so we can see what is left to tackle")
> > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v3.4+
> > > Reported-by: syzbot+522643ab5729b0421998@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c | 6 +++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c b/drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c
> > > index ee6c91ef1f6cf..57d681706fa85 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c
> > > @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@
> > >  char vt_dont_switch;
> > >  extern struct tty_driver *console_driver;
> > >  
> > > -#define VT_IS_IN_USE(i)	(console_driver->ttys[i] && console_driver->ttys[i]->count)
> > > +#define VT_IS_IN_USE(i)	(console_driver->ttys[i] != NULL)
> > >  #define VT_BUSY(i)	(VT_IS_IN_USE(i) || i == fg_console || vc_cons[i].d == sel_cons)
> > >  
> > >  /*
> > > @@ -288,12 +288,14 @@ static int vt_disallocate(unsigned int vc_num)
> > >  	struct vc_data *vc = NULL;
> > >  	int ret = 0;
> > >  
> > > +	mutex_lock(&tty_mutex); /* synchronize with release_tty() */
> > >  	console_lock();
> > 
> > Is this lock dependency new or pre-existing?
> 
> It's the same locking order used during release_tty().
> 
> > 
> > Locking tty_mutex here does not sound quite right. What about switching
> > vc_data to proper refcounting based on tty_port? (Instead of doing
> > tty_port_destroy and kfree in vt_disallocate*.)
> > 
> 
> How would that work?  We could make struct vc_data refcounted such that
> VT_DISALLOCATE doesn't free it right away but rather it's freed in the next
> con_shutdown().  But release_tty() still accesses tty->port afterwards, which is
> part of the 'struct vc_data' that would have just been freed.
> 

Jiri, can you explain what you meant here?  I don't see how your suggestion
would solve the problem.

Greg, any opinion?

- Eric