Subject: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Handle errors from vgic_add_lpi

From: [email-masked] (Christoffer Dall)
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 21:49:30 +0200

On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 04:18:46PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 02/08/16 16:08, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:35:27AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> On 01/08/16 19:29, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> >>> During low memory conditions, we could be dereferencing a NULL pointer
> >>> when vgic_add_lpi fails to allocate memory.
> >>>
> >>> Consider for example this call sequence:
> >>>
> >>>   vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi
> >>>       itte->irq = vgic_add_lpi(kvm, lpi_nr);
> >>>           update_lpi_config(kvm, itte->irq, NULL);
> >>>               ret = kvm_read_guest(kvm, propbase + irq->intid
> >>> 	                                             ^^^^
> >>> 						     kaboom?
> >>>
> >>> Instead, return an error pointer from vgic_add_lpi and check the return
> >>> value from its single caller.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <[email-masked]>
> >>> ---
> >>>  virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >>>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> >>> index 07411cf..3515bdb 100644
> >>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> >>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> >>> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid)
> >>>  
> >>>  	irq = kzalloc(sizeof(struct vgic_irq), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>  	if (!irq)
> >>> -		return NULL;
> >>> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> >>>  
> >>>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&irq->lpi_list);
> >>>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&irq->ap_list);
> >>> @@ -697,24 +697,33 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>>  	struct its_device *device;
> >>>  	struct its_collection *collection, *new_coll = NULL;
> >>>  	int lpi_nr;
> >>> -
> >>> -	device = find_its_device(its, device_id);
> >>> -	if (!device)
> >>> -		return E_ITS_MAPTI_UNMAPPED_DEVICE;
> >>> +	struct vgic_irq *irq = NULL;
> >>> +	int err = 0;
> >>>  
> >>>  	if (its_cmd_get_command(its_cmd) == GITS_CMD_MAPTI)
> >>>  		lpi_nr = its_cmd_get_physical_id(its_cmd);
> >>>  	else
> >>>  		lpi_nr = event_id;
> >>> +
> >>>  	if (lpi_nr < GIC_LPI_OFFSET ||
> >>>  	    lpi_nr >= max_lpis_propbaser(kvm->arch.vgic.propbaser))
> >>>  		return E_ITS_MAPTI_PHYSICALID_OOR;
> >>>  
> >>> +	irq = vgic_add_lpi(kvm, lpi_nr);
> >>> +	if (IS_ERR(irq))
> >>> +		return PTR_ERR(irq);
> >>> +
> >>> +	device = find_its_device(its, device_id);
> >>> +	if (!device) {
> >>> +		err = E_ITS_MAPTI_UNMAPPED_DEVICE;
> >>> +		goto out;
> >>> +	}
> >>> +
> >>>  	collection = find_collection(its, coll_id);
> >>>  	if (!collection) {
> >>> -		int ret = vgic_its_alloc_collection(its, &collection, coll_id);
> >>> -		if (ret)
> >>> -			return ret;
> >>> +		err = vgic_its_alloc_collection(its, &collection, coll_id);
> >>> +		if (err)
> >>> +			goto out;
> >>>  		new_coll = collection;
> >>>  	}
> >>>  
> >>> @@ -722,9 +731,8 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>>  	if (!itte) {
> >>>  		itte = kzalloc(sizeof(struct its_itte), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>  		if (!itte) {
> >>> -			if (new_coll)
> >>> -				vgic_its_free_collection(its, coll_id);
> >>> -			return -ENOMEM;
> >>> +			err = -ENOMEM;
> >>> +			goto out;
> >>>  		}
> >>>  
> >>>  		itte->event_id	= event_id;
> >>> @@ -733,7 +741,8 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>>  
> >>>  	itte->collection = collection;
> >>>  	itte->lpi = lpi_nr;
> >>> -	itte->irq = vgic_add_lpi(kvm, lpi_nr);
> >>> +	vgic_get_irq_kref(irq);
> >>> +	itte->irq = irq;
> >>>  	update_affinity_itte(kvm, itte);
> >>>  
> >>>  	/*
> >>> @@ -742,8 +751,15 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> >>>  	 * the respective config data from memory here upon mapping the LPI.
> >>>  	 */
> >>>  	update_lpi_config(kvm, itte->irq, NULL);
> >>> +	new_coll = NULL;
> >>> +	irq = NULL;
> >>>  
> >>> -	return 0;
> >>> +out:
> >>> +	if (new_coll)
> >>> +		vgic_its_free_collection(its, coll_id);
> >>> +	if (irq)
> >>> +		vgic_put_irq(kvm, irq);
> >>
> >> Ah, it took me a moment to understand why you had the
> >> vgic_irq_get_kref() above. Maybe a small comment?
> >>
> > 
> > actually, now I'm confused.
> > 
> > vgic_add_lpi returns a struct vgic_irq with a reference count for the
> > reference in the itte struct, right?
> 
> It either returns a vgic_irq with a refcount set to 1 (freshly
> allocated), or a previously allocated one with the refcount already
> incremented.
> 
> > So we never get a reference for the irq->lpi_list/dist->lpi_list_head ?
> 
> I don't think so. being part of the lpi_list is a part of the LPI
> "existence".

hmm, ok, but since we're not holding the lock while decrementing the ref
count(only after we evaluate kref_put) it looks to me like you can end
up with a reference to a freed structure.

Basically, I think we need this:

diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
index e7aeac7..fb8c0ab 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
@@ -117,22 +117,22 @@ static void vgic_irq_release(struct kref *ref)
 
 void vgic_put_irq(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
 {
-	struct vgic_dist *dist;
+	struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
 
 	if (irq->intid < VGIC_MIN_LPI)
 		return;
 
-	if (!kref_put(&irq->refcount, vgic_irq_release))
-		return;
-
-	dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
-
 	spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
-	list_del(&irq->lpi_list);
-	dist->lpi_list_count--;
-	spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+	if (!kref_put(&irq->refcount, vgic_irq_release)) {
+		spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+		return;
+	} else {
+		list_del(&irq->lpi_list);
+		dist->lpi_list_count--;
+		spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
 
-	kfree(irq);
+		kfree(irq);
+	}
 }
 
 /**

Thoughts?

> 
> > In which case my code above is wrong and I should not be getting the
> > extra reference.  Right?
> 
> Ah, I just noticed that you are nullifying "irq". Either you don't
> nullify it (and keep the kref_get), or remove both kref_get/kref_put,
> but that makes your error handling a bit mot complicated.
> 

I'll rewrite this patch.

> > Now, this made me think of another issue.  vgic_add_lpi has a blurb in
> > there about racing with another vgic_add_lpi and then it returns an irq
> > with an additional reference.  But I don't understand how this can
> > happen, given that the function only has a single caller which has to
> > run with a mutex held???
> 
> The mutex is per-ITS, and you can have several ITSs mapping the same LPI
> (provided that they are generated by the same devid/evid).
> 
> > Can two different itte's point to the same struct vgic_irq ?
> 
> Definitely, if they are on different ITSs.
> 
> Does it help?
> 
Yes, this helps, and gives meaning to the comment in the function.

Thanks!
-Christoffer