Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-149916-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:50:52 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	ionela.voinescu@arm.com, vanshikonda@os.amperecomputing.com,
	will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, sumitg@nvidia.com,
	yang@os.amperecomputing.com, lihuisong@huawei.com,
	viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] arm64: amu: Rule out potential use after free
Message-ID: <20240418105052.zvkomz5yeayie4ph@bogus>
References: <20240417093848.1555462-1-beata.michalska@arm.com>
 <20240417093848.1555462-3-beata.michalska@arm.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240417093848.1555462-3-beata.michalska@arm.com>

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:38:45AM +0100, Beata Michalska wrote:
> For the time being, the amu_fie_cpus cpumask is being exclusively used
> by the AMU-related internals of FIE support and is guaranteed to be
> valid on every access currently made. Still the mask is not being
> invalidated on one of the error handling code paths, which leaves
> a soft spot with potential risk of uaf for CPUMASK_OFFSTACK cases.
> To make things sound, set the cpumaks pointer explicitly to NULL upon
> failing to register the cpufreq notifier.
> Note that, due to the quirks of CPUMASK_OFFSTACK, this change needs to
> be wrapped with grim ifdefing (it would be better served by
> incorporating this into free_cpumask_var ...)
>

Yes it doesn't look neat.

> Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> index 1a2c72f3e7f8..3c814a278534 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> @@ -244,8 +244,12 @@ static int __init init_amu_fie(void)
>
>  	ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&init_amu_fie_notifier,
>  					CPUFREQ_POLICY_NOTIFIER);
> -	if (ret)
> +	if (ret) {
>  		free_cpumask_var(amu_fie_cpus);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
> +		amu_fie_cpus = NULL;
> +#endif
> +	}

Instead of this #ifdeffery, I was wondering if we can actually do the
allocation in init_amu_fie_callback() the first time it gets called
checking if amu_fie_cpus is NULL. init_amu_fie_callback() must get called
only if the cpufreq_register_notifier() succeeds right ?

Also I don't see anyone calling amu_fie_setup(), so where do you think
the possible use after free could occur for amu_fie_cpus. Just thinking
out loud to check if I missed anything.

--
Regards,
Sudeep