Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates
 216.228.117.161 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=216.228.117.161; helo=mail.nvidia.com; pr=C
References: <20230217140939.487978-1-n.petrova@fintech.ru>
User-agent: mu4e 1.6.6; emacs 28.1
From:   Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
To:     Natalia Petrova <n.petrova@fintech.ru>
CC:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>, Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <lvc-project@linuxtesting.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mlxsw_spectrum_router: add check for return value of
 'mlxsw_sp_rif_find_by_dev'
Date:   Fri, 17 Feb 2023 18:38:06 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20230217140939.487978-1-n.petrova@fintech.ru>
Message-ID: <877cwgb2tu.fsf@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Feb 2023 17:48:45.6680
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d7181e11-6354-468e-20d0-08db110f379a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.117.161];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DS1PEPF0000E64B.namprd02.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN0PR12MB6053
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


Natalia Petrova <n.petrova@fintech.ru> writes:

> Pointer 'rif' that contains the return value of 'mlxsw_sp_rif_find_by_dev'
> is checked for NULL to avoid possible undefined behavior below caused by
> dereference in 'mlxsw_sp_rif_destroy'.
>
> Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
>
> Fixes: e4f3c1c17b6d ("mlxsw: spectrum_router: Implement common RIF core")
> Signed-off-by: Natalia Petrova <n.petrova@fintech.ru>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
> index 2c4443c6b964..4f41b83d7c9e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
> @@ -8658,7 +8658,8 @@ static int mlxsw_sp_inetaddr_bridge_event(struct mlxsw_sp *mlxsw_sp,
>  		break;
>  	case NETDEV_DOWN:
>  		rif = mlxsw_sp_rif_find_by_dev(mlxsw_sp, l3_dev);
> -		mlxsw_sp_rif_destroy(rif);
> +		if (rif)
> +			mlxsw_sp_rif_destroy(rif);
>  		break;
>  	}

I don't think this can happen. The corresponding NETDEV_UP is invoked
through address validator chain, so failures to create a RIF would be
vetoed. Furthermore the DOWN event itself is invoked by
mlxsw_sp_inetaddr_event(), where the invocation is contingent on
mlxsw_sp_rif_should_config(). That would be false if there's no RIF.