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:   Tue, 30 May 2023 14:43:30 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Stephan Gerhold <stephan.gerhold@kernkonzept.com>
Cc:     Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] opp: Fix use-after-free in lazy_opp_tables after probe
 deferral
Message-ID: <20230530091330.e3nawo6ey2an4ir2@vireshk-i7>
References: <20230524-opp-lazy-uaf-v1-1-f5f95cb4b6de@kernkonzept.com>
 <20230529053148.xuhuv6skg2xqworr@vireshk-i7>
 <ZHW0YY4xoUmR_UPg@kernkonzept.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZHW0YY4xoUmR_UPg@kernkonzept.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 30-05-23, 10:31, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> Thanks, this seems to fix the crash as well. Are you going to handle it
> or should I send a v2 with this diff?

Please send a V2 :)

> During _allocate_opp_table() it's accessed without the opp_table_lock,
> because of
> 
> 	/* Drop the lock to reduce the size of critical section */
> 	mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock);
> 
> 	if (opp_table) {
> 		/* ... */
> 		mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock);
> 	} else {
> 		opp_table = _allocate_opp_table(dev, index);
> 
> 		mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock);
> 		/* ... */
> 	}
> 
> This doesn't seem to cause any problems in my case though so it's
> unrelated to the crash I observed.

Hmm, right. Maybe we need a lock for that list, want to take that up ?

-- 
viresh