Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:07:54 +0800
From:   Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
To:     Zheng Hacker <hackerzheng666@gmail.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, alex000young@gmail.com,
        security@kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com, airlied@linux.ie,
        intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhenyuw@linux.intel.com,
        xmzyshypnc <1002992920@qq.com>, jani.nikula@linux.intel.com,
        daniel@ffwll.ch, rodrigo.vivi@intel.com,
        intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org, zhi.a.wang@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/gvt: fix double-free bug in split_2MB_gtt_entry.
Message-ID: <20220907030754.GU1089@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com>
Reply-To: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
References: <tencent_E1BBF05904DFB73C478DCD592740AAE0780A@qq.com>
 <CAJedcCxVW++iH49UFZp9ruUuTcNubWCH6Wsqe11K4COB3E8msg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJedcCw1eJqjSK+yR7eQMDheNtH3Mjm+viwt00xAhnmrfpq2pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJedcCweHjD78F7iydiq6Xc2iH=t_3m=H9JKnaCooToUk32FvQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YxWtfjfpNsoPUrgh@kroah.com>
 <CAJedcCzMo51aiy=Dv7zn7VmL3gwkw7JgzwAPAB2Z27C9CnhoYA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kGQlNN4Ir6FkfZg7"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJedcCzMo51aiy=Dv7zn7VmL3gwkw7JgzwAPAB2Z27C9CnhoYA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


--kGQlNN4Ir6FkfZg7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2022.09.06 19:36:56 +0800, Zheng Hacker wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>=20
> Alex has explained how we figured out the patch. We did analyze the
> code and found it possible to reach the vulnerability code. But we
> have no physical device in hand to test the driver. So we'd like to
> discuss with developers to see if the issue exists or not.
>=20
> Best regards,
> Zheng Wang.
>=20
> Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> ???2022???9???5????????? 16:04??????=
???
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 03:46:09PM +0800, Zheng Hacker wrote:
> > > I rewrote the letter. Hope it works.
> > >
> > > There is a double-free security bug in split_2MB_gtt_entry.
> > >
> > > Here is a calling chain :
> > > ppgtt_populate_spt->ppgtt_populate_shadow_entry->split_2MB_gtt_entry.
> > > If intel_gvt_dma_map_guest_page failed, it will call
> > > ppgtt_invalidate_spt, which will finally call ppgtt_free_spt and
> > > kfree(spt). But the caller does not notice that, and it will call
> > > ppgtt_free_spt again in error path.
> > >

It's a little mess in code so in theory it might be possible but
intel_gvt_dma_map_guest_page won't fail in practise...

> > > Fix this by returning the result of ppgtt_invalidate_spt to split_2MB=
_gtt_entry.
> > >

I don't see why changing ret value can fix this issue, as it doesn't change
any behavior e.g caller of ppgtt_populate_spt to handle possible different =
error return.

As current code looks assuming that ppgtt_invalidate_spt would free spt in =
good case,
I think the real cleanup should split that assumption and handle free in er=
ror case properly.

> > > Signed-off-by: Zheng Wang

This misses proper email address.

thanks

> > >
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gv=
t/gtt.c
> > > index ce0eb03709c3..9f14fded8c0c 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c
> > > @@ -1215,7 +1215,7 @@ static int split_2MB_gtt_entry(struct intel_vgp=
u *vgpu,
> > >                 ret =3D intel_gvt_dma_map_guest_page(vgpu, start_gfn =
+ sub_index,
> > >                                                    PAGE_SIZE, &dma_ad=
dr);
> > >                 if (ret) {
> > > -                       ppgtt_invalidate_spt(spt);
> > > +                       ret =3D ppgtt_invalidate_spt(spt);
> > >                         return ret;
> >
> > But now you just lost the original error, shouldn't this succeed even if
> > intel_gvt_dma_map_guest_page() failed?
> >
> > And how are you causing intel_gvt_dma_map_guest_page() to fail in a real
> > system?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h

--kGQlNN4Ir6FkfZg7
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EARECAB0WIQTXuabgHDW6LPt9CICxBBozTXgYJwUCYxgK9QAKCRCxBBozTXgY
J1DZAJsH9UU2cPdrsdx4hf7SuJorjWTN/gCeKxA/bnVUbWogMgtUPWYV8HOG9+8=
=3CHX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--kGQlNN4Ir6FkfZg7--