dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

[PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Koba Ko 1 year, 6 months ago

If the passed client_count is 0,
it would be incremented by balance_ref_count first
then increment one more.
This would cause client_count to 2.

cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use
2
2
2

Fixes: d2f4f99db3e9 ("dmaengine: Rework dma_chan_get")
Signed-off-by: Koba Ko <koba.ko@canonical.com>
Reviewed-by: Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>
Test-by: Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>

---
V2: Remove [3/3] on subject.
---
 drivers/dma/dmaengine.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c b/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c
index 2cfa8458b51be..78f8a9f3ad825 100644
--- a/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c
+++ b/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c
@@ -451,7 +451,8 @@ static int dma_chan_get(struct dma_chan *chan)
 	/* The channel is already in use, update client count */
 	if (chan->client_count) {
 		__module_get(owner);
-		goto out;
+		chan->client_count++;
+		return 0;
 	}
 
 	if (!try_module_get(owner))
@@ -470,11 +471,11 @@ static int dma_chan_get(struct dma_chan *chan)
 			goto err_out;
 	}
 
+	chan->client_count++;
+
 	if (!dma_has_cap(DMA_PRIVATE, chan->device->cap_mask))
 		balance_ref_count(chan);
 
-out:
-	chan->client_count++;
 	return 0;
 
 err_out:
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Jerry Snitselaar 1 year, 5 months ago

Hi Vinod,

Thoughts on this patch?

Maybe changing the summary to "dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()"
would be clearer?

On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 01:36:52AM +0800, Koba Ko wrote:
> If the passed client_count is 0,
> it would be incremented by balance_ref_count first
> then increment one more.
> This would cause client_count to 2.
>
> cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use
> 2
> 2
> 2

Would this be better?

    The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel
    client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels,
    first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This
    results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the
    channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple
    test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell
    Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow
    warning.


Regards,
Jerry

>
> Fixes: d2f4f99db3e9 ("dmaengine: Rework dma_chan_get")
> Signed-off-by: Koba Ko <koba.ko@canonical.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>
> Test-by: Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
> 
> ---
> V2: Remove [3/3] on subject.
> ---
>  drivers/dma/dmaengine.c | 7 ++++---
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c b/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c
> index 2cfa8458b51be..78f8a9f3ad825 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c
> @@ -451,7 +451,8 @@ static int dma_chan_get(struct dma_chan *chan)
>  	/* The channel is already in use, update client count */
>  	if (chan->client_count) {
>  		__module_get(owner);
> -		goto out;
> +		chan->client_count++;
> +		return 0;
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!try_module_get(owner))
> @@ -470,11 +471,11 @@ static int dma_chan_get(struct dma_chan *chan)
>  			goto err_out;
>  	}
>  
> +	chan->client_count++;
> +
>  	if (!dma_has_cap(DMA_PRIVATE, chan->device->cap_mask))
>  		balance_ref_count(chan);
>  
> -out:
> -	chan->client_count++;
>  	return 0;
>  
>  err_out:
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>

Re: [PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Vinod Koul 1 year, 5 months ago

On 02-11-22, 11:07, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
> 
> Thoughts on this patch?
> 
> Maybe changing the summary to "dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()"
> would be clearer?

Yes that would be better

> 
> On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 01:36:52AM +0800, Koba Ko wrote:
> > If the passed client_count is 0,
> > it would be incremented by balance_ref_count first
> > then increment one more.
> > This would cause client_count to 2.
> >
> > cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use
> > 2
> > 2
> > 2
> 
> Would this be better?
> 
>     The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel
>     client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels,
>     first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This
>     results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the
>     channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple
>     test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell
>     Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow
>     warning.

Agree, also if you have the underflow warning handy, do add it to the
log

-- 
~Vinod

Re: [PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Jerry Snitselaar 1 year, 5 months ago

On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 06:55:21PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 02-11-22, 11:07, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > Hi Vinod,
> > 
> > Thoughts on this patch?
> > 
> > Maybe changing the summary to "dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()"
> > would be clearer?
> 
> Yes that would be better
> 
> > 
> > On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 01:36:52AM +0800, Koba Ko wrote:
> > > If the passed client_count is 0,
> > > it would be incremented by balance_ref_count first
> > > then increment one more.
> > > This would cause client_count to 2.
> > >
> > > cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use
> > > 2
> > > 2
> > > 2
> > 
> > Would this be better?
> > 
> >     The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel
> >     client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels,
> >     first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This
> >     results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the
> >     channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple
> >     test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell
> >     Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow
> >     warning.
> 
> Agree, also if you have the underflow warning handy, do add it to the
> log
> 

I don't know if Canonical saw that in their testing, but that was how our
QE initially found the issue.

[  124.329662] async_tx: api initialized (async)
[  129.000627] async_tx: api initialized (async)
[  130.047839] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[  130.052472] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.
[  130.057279] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 19364 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
[  130.065811] Modules linked in: async_tx(-) rfkill intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common amd64_edac edac_mce_amd ipmi_ssif kvm_amd dcdbas kvm mgag200 drm_shmem_helper acpi_ipmi irqbypass drm_kms_helper ipmi_si syscopyarea sysfillrect rapl pcspkr ipmi_devintf sysimgblt fb_sys_fops k10temp i2c_piix4 ipmi_msghandler acpi_power_meter acpi_cpufreq vfat fat drm fuse xfs libcrc32c sd_mod t10_pi sg ahci crct10dif_pclmul libahci crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel igb megaraid_sas i40e libata i2c_algo_bit ccp sp5100_tco dca dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: async_tx]
[  130.117361] CPU: 3 PID: 19364 Comm: modprobe Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.14.0-185.el9.x86_64 #1
[  130.126091] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R7425/02MJ3T, BIOS 1.18.0 01/17/2022
[  130.133806] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
[  130.139041] Code: 01 01 e8 6d bd 55 00 0f 0b e9 72 9d 8a 00 80 3d 26 18 9c 01 00 75 85 48 c7 c7 f8 a3 03 9d c6 05 16 18 9c 01 01 e8 4a bd 55 00 <0f> 0b e9 4f 9d 8a 00 80 3d 01 18 9c 01 00 0f 85 5e ff ff ff 48 c7
[  130.157807] RSP: 0018:ffffbf98898afe68 EFLAGS: 00010286
[  130.163036] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9da06028e598 RCX: 0000000000000000
[  130.170172] RDX: ffff9daf9de26480 RSI: ffff9daf9de198a0 RDI: ffff9daf9de198a0
[  130.177316] RBP: ffff9da7cddf3970 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffff7fff
[  130.184459] R10: ffffbf98898afd00 R11: ffffffff9d9e8c28 R12: ffff9da7cddf1970
[  130.191596] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
[  130.198739] FS:  00007f646435c740(0000) GS:ffff9daf9de00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[  130.206832] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[  130.212586] CR2: 00007f6463b214f0 CR3: 00000008ab98c000 CR4: 00000000003506e0
[  130.219729] Call Trace:
[  130.222192]  <TASK>
[  130.224305]  dma_chan_put+0x10d/0x110
[  130.227988]  dmaengine_put+0x7a/0xa0
[  130.231575]  __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x178/0x280
[  130.237157]  ? syscall_trace_enter.constprop.0+0x145/0x1d0
[  130.242652]  do_syscall_64+0x5c/0x90
[  130.246240]  ? exc_page_fault+0x62/0x150
[  130.250178]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
[  130.255243] RIP: 0033:0x7f6463a3f5ab
[  130.258830] Code: 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 75 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48 83 c8 ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa b8 b0 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 45 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
[  130.277591] RSP: 002b:00007fff22f972c8 EFLAGS: 00000206 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000b0
[  130.285164] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 000055b6786edd40 RCX: 00007f6463a3f5ab
[  130.292303] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000800 RDI: 000055b6786edda8
[  130.299443] RBP: 000055b6786edd40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
[  130.306584] R10: 00007f6463b9eac0 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 000055b6786edda8
[  130.313731] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 000055b6786edda8 R15: 00007fff22f995f8
[  130.320875]  </TASK>
[  130.323081] ---[ end trace eff7156d56b5cf25 ]---


Regards,
Jerry

> -- 
> ~Vinod

Re: [PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Vinod Koul 1 year, 5 months ago

On 04-11-22, 08:36, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 06:55:21PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 02-11-22, 11:07, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > Hi Vinod,
> > > 
> > > Thoughts on this patch?
> > > 
> > > Maybe changing the summary to "dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()"
> > > would be clearer?
> > 
> > Yes that would be better
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 01:36:52AM +0800, Koba Ko wrote:
> > > > If the passed client_count is 0,
> > > > it would be incremented by balance_ref_count first
> > > > then increment one more.
> > > > This would cause client_count to 2.
> > > >
> > > > cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use
> > > > 2
> > > > 2
> > > > 2
> > > 
> > > Would this be better?
> > > 
> > >     The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel
> > >     client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels,
> > >     first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This
> > >     results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the
> > >     channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple
> > >     test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell
> > >     Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow
> > >     warning.
> > 
> > Agree, also if you have the underflow warning handy, do add it to the
> > log
> > 
> 
> I don't know if Canonical saw that in their testing, but that was how our
> QE initially found the issue.
> 
> [  124.329662] async_tx: api initialized (async)
> [  129.000627] async_tx: api initialized (async)
> [  130.047839] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [  130.052472] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.
> [  130.057279] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 19364 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
> [  130.065811] Modules linked in: async_tx(-) rfkill intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common amd64_edac edac_mce_amd ipmi_ssif kvm_amd dcdbas kvm mgag200 drm_shmem_helper acpi_ipmi irqbypass drm_kms_helper ipmi_si syscopyarea sysfillrect rapl pcspkr ipmi_devintf sysimgblt fb_sys_fops k10temp i2c_piix4 ipmi_msghandler acpi_power_meter acpi_cpufreq vfat fat drm fuse xfs libcrc32c sd_mod t10_pi sg ahci crct10dif_pclmul libahci crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel igb megaraid_sas i40e libata i2c_algo_bit ccp sp5100_tco dca dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: async_tx]
> [  130.117361] CPU: 3 PID: 19364 Comm: modprobe Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.14.0-185.el9.x86_64 #1
> [  130.126091] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R7425/02MJ3T, BIOS 1.18.0 01/17/2022
> [  130.133806] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
> [  130.139041] Code: 01 01 e8 6d bd 55 00 0f 0b e9 72 9d 8a 00 80 3d 26 18 9c 01 00 75 85 48 c7 c7 f8 a3 03 9d c6 05 16 18 9c 01 01 e8 4a bd 55 00 <0f> 0b e9 4f 9d 8a 00 80 3d 01 18 9c 01 00 0f 85 5e ff ff ff 48 c7
> [  130.157807] RSP: 0018:ffffbf98898afe68 EFLAGS: 00010286
> [  130.163036] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9da06028e598 RCX: 0000000000000000
> [  130.170172] RDX: ffff9daf9de26480 RSI: ffff9daf9de198a0 RDI: ffff9daf9de198a0
> [  130.177316] RBP: ffff9da7cddf3970 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffff7fff
> [  130.184459] R10: ffffbf98898afd00 R11: ffffffff9d9e8c28 R12: ffff9da7cddf1970
> [  130.191596] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> [  130.198739] FS:  00007f646435c740(0000) GS:ffff9daf9de00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> [  130.206832] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [  130.212586] CR2: 00007f6463b214f0 CR3: 00000008ab98c000 CR4: 00000000003506e0
> [  130.219729] Call Trace:
> [  130.222192]  <TASK>
> [  130.224305]  dma_chan_put+0x10d/0x110
> [  130.227988]  dmaengine_put+0x7a/0xa0
> [  130.231575]  __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x178/0x280
> [  130.237157]  ? syscall_trace_enter.constprop.0+0x145/0x1d0
> [  130.242652]  do_syscall_64+0x5c/0x90
> [  130.246240]  ? exc_page_fault+0x62/0x150
> [  130.250178]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
> [  130.255243] RIP: 0033:0x7f6463a3f5ab
> [  130.258830] Code: 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 75 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48 83 c8 ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa b8 b0 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 45 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> [  130.277591] RSP: 002b:00007fff22f972c8 EFLAGS: 00000206 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000b0
> [  130.285164] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 000055b6786edd40 RCX: 00007f6463a3f5ab
> [  130.292303] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000800 RDI: 000055b6786edda8
> [  130.299443] RBP: 000055b6786edd40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> [  130.306584] R10: 00007f6463b9eac0 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 000055b6786edda8
> [  130.313731] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 000055b6786edda8 R15: 00007fff22f995f8
> [  130.320875]  </TASK>
> [  130.323081] ---[ end trace eff7156d56b5cf25 ]---

This is good, give more details and should be added to log in next
iteration

-- 
~Vinod

Re: [PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Koba Ko 1 year, 5 months ago

hi Vinod,
Should i re-submit v3 as per comments?

Koba Ko

On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 3:18 PM Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On 04-11-22, 08:36, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 06:55:21PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On 02-11-22, 11:07, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > > Hi Vinod,
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts on this patch?
> > > >
> > > > Maybe changing the summary to "dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()"
> > > > would be clearer?
> > >
> > > Yes that would be better
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 01:36:52AM +0800, Koba Ko wrote:
> > > > > If the passed client_count is 0,
> > > > > it would be incremented by balance_ref_count first
> > > > > then increment one more.
> > > > > This would cause client_count to 2.
> > > > >
> > > > > cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use
> > > > > 2
> > > > > 2
> > > > > 2
> > > >
> > > > Would this be better?
> > > >
> > > >     The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel
> > > >     client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels,
> > > >     first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This
> > > >     results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the
> > > >     channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple
> > > >     test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell
> > > >     Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow
> > > >     warning.
> > >
> > > Agree, also if you have the underflow warning handy, do add it to the
> > > log
> > >
> >
> > I don't know if Canonical saw that in their testing, but that was how our
> > QE initially found the issue.
> >
> > [  124.329662] async_tx: api initialized (async)
> > [  129.000627] async_tx: api initialized (async)
> > [  130.047839] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [  130.052472] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.
> > [  130.057279] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 19364 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
> > [  130.065811] Modules linked in: async_tx(-) rfkill intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common amd64_edac edac_mce_amd ipmi_ssif kvm_amd dcdbas kvm mgag200 drm_shmem_helper acpi_ipmi irqbypass drm_kms_helper ipmi_si syscopyarea sysfillrect rapl pcspkr ipmi_devintf sysimgblt fb_sys_fops k10temp i2c_piix4 ipmi_msghandler acpi_power_meter acpi_cpufreq vfat fat drm fuse xfs libcrc32c sd_mod t10_pi sg ahci crct10dif_pclmul libahci crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel igb megaraid_sas i40e libata i2c_algo_bit ccp sp5100_tco dca dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: async_tx]
> > [  130.117361] CPU: 3 PID: 19364 Comm: modprobe Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.14.0-185.el9.x86_64 #1
> > [  130.126091] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R7425/02MJ3T, BIOS 1.18.0 01/17/2022
> > [  130.133806] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
> > [  130.139041] Code: 01 01 e8 6d bd 55 00 0f 0b e9 72 9d 8a 00 80 3d 26 18 9c 01 00 75 85 48 c7 c7 f8 a3 03 9d c6 05 16 18 9c 01 01 e8 4a bd 55 00 <0f> 0b e9 4f 9d 8a 00 80 3d 01 18 9c 01 00 0f 85 5e ff ff ff 48 c7
> > [  130.157807] RSP: 0018:ffffbf98898afe68 EFLAGS: 00010286
> > [  130.163036] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9da06028e598 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > [  130.170172] RDX: ffff9daf9de26480 RSI: ffff9daf9de198a0 RDI: ffff9daf9de198a0
> > [  130.177316] RBP: ffff9da7cddf3970 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffff7fff
> > [  130.184459] R10: ffffbf98898afd00 R11: ffffffff9d9e8c28 R12: ffff9da7cddf1970
> > [  130.191596] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> > [  130.198739] FS:  00007f646435c740(0000) GS:ffff9daf9de00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > [  130.206832] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > [  130.212586] CR2: 00007f6463b214f0 CR3: 00000008ab98c000 CR4: 00000000003506e0
> > [  130.219729] Call Trace:
> > [  130.222192]  <TASK>
> > [  130.224305]  dma_chan_put+0x10d/0x110
> > [  130.227988]  dmaengine_put+0x7a/0xa0
> > [  130.231575]  __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x178/0x280
> > [  130.237157]  ? syscall_trace_enter.constprop.0+0x145/0x1d0
> > [  130.242652]  do_syscall_64+0x5c/0x90
> > [  130.246240]  ? exc_page_fault+0x62/0x150
> > [  130.250178]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
> > [  130.255243] RIP: 0033:0x7f6463a3f5ab
> > [  130.258830] Code: 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 75 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48 83 c8 ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa b8 b0 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 45 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > [  130.277591] RSP: 002b:00007fff22f972c8 EFLAGS: 00000206 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000b0
> > [  130.285164] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 000055b6786edd40 RCX: 00007f6463a3f5ab
> > [  130.292303] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000800 RDI: 000055b6786edda8
> > [  130.299443] RBP: 000055b6786edd40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > [  130.306584] R10: 00007f6463b9eac0 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 000055b6786edda8
> > [  130.313731] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 000055b6786edda8 R15: 00007fff22f995f8
> > [  130.320875]  </TASK>
> > [  130.323081] ---[ end trace eff7156d56b5cf25 ]---
>
> This is good, give more details and should be added to log in next
> iteration
>
> --
> ~Vinod

Re: [PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Koba Ko 1 year, 5 months ago

I would like to send v3.
Because the comments provided by Jerry are more detail, i would like
replace the original with his comments.

Here's draft,

dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()

The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel
client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels,
first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This
results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the
channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple
 test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell
 Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow
 warning.

[  124.329662] async_tx: api initialized (async)
[  129.000627] async_tx: api initialized (async)
[  130.047839] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[  130.052472] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.
[  130.057279] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 19364 at lib/refcount.c:28
refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
[  130.065811] Modules linked in: async_tx(-) rfkill intel_rapl_msr
intel_rapl_common amd64_edac edac_mce_amd ipmi_ssif kvm_amd dcdbas kvm
mgag200 drm_shmem_helper acpi_ipmi irqbypass drm_kms_helper ipmi_si
syscopyarea sysfillrect rapl pcspkr ipmi_devintf sysimgblt fb_sys_fops
k10temp i2c_piix4 ipmi_msghandler acpi_power_meter acpi_cpufreq vfat
fat drm fuse xfs libcrc32c sd_mod t10_pi sg ahci crct10dif_pclmul
libahci crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel igb megaraid_sas
i40e libata i2c_algo_bit ccp sp5100_tco dca dm_mirror dm_region_hash
dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: async_tx]
[  130.117361] CPU: 3 PID: 19364 Comm: modprobe Kdump: loaded Not
tainted 5.14.0-185.el9.x86_64 #1
[  130.126091] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R7425/02MJ3T, BIOS
1.18.0 01/17/2022
[  130.133806] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
[  130.139041] Code: 01 01 e8 6d bd 55 00 0f 0b e9 72 9d 8a 00 80 3d
26 18 9c 01 00 75 85 48 c7 c7 f8 a3 03 9d c6 05 16 18 9c 01 01 e8 4a
bd 55 00 <0f> 0b e9 4f 9d 8a 00 80 3d 01 18 9c 01 00 0f 85 5e ff ff ff
48 c7
[  130.157807] RSP: 0018:ffffbf98898afe68 EFLAGS: 00010286
[  130.163036] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9da06028e598 RCX: 0000000000000000
[  130.170172] RDX: ffff9daf9de26480 RSI: ffff9daf9de198a0 RDI: ffff9daf9de198a0
[  130.177316] RBP: ffff9da7cddf3970 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffff7fff
[  130.184459] R10: ffffbf98898afd00 R11: ffffffff9d9e8c28 R12: ffff9da7cddf1970
[  130.191596] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
[  130.198739] FS:  00007f646435c740(0000) GS:ffff9daf9de00000(0000)
knlGS:0000000000000000
[  130.206832] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[  130.212586] CR2: 00007f6463b214f0 CR3: 00000008ab98c000 CR4: 00000000003506e0
[  130.219729] Call Trace:
[  130.222192]  <TASK>
[  130.224305]  dma_chan_put+0x10d/0x110
[  130.227988]  dmaengine_put+0x7a/0xa0
[  130.231575]  __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x178/0x280
[  130.237157]  ? syscall_trace_enter.constprop.0+0x145/0x1d0
[  130.242652]  do_syscall_64+0x5c/0x90
[  130.246240]  ? exc_page_fault+0x62/0x150
[  130.250178]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
[  130.255243] RIP: 0033:0x7f6463a3f5ab
[  130.258830] Code: 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 75 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
83 c8 ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa b8 b0 00 00
00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 45 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89
01 48
[  130.277591] RSP: 002b:00007fff22f972c8 EFLAGS: 00000206 ORIG_RAX:
00000000000000b0
[  130.285164] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 000055b6786edd40 RCX: 00007f6463a3f5ab
[  130.292303] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000800 RDI: 000055b6786edda8
[  130.299443] RBP: 000055b6786edd40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
[  130.306584] R10: 00007f6463b9eac0 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 000055b6786edda8
[  130.313731] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 000055b6786edda8 R15: 00007fff22f995f8
[  130.320875]  </TASK>
[  130.323081] ---[ end trace eff7156d56b5cf25 ]---

cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use would get the wrong result.
2
2
2

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 2:32 PM Koba Ko <koba.ko@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> hi Vinod,
> Should i re-submit v3 as per comments?
>
> Koba Ko
>
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 3:18 PM Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 04-11-22, 08:36, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 06:55:21PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > On 02-11-22, 11:07, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > > > Hi Vinod,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts on this patch?
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe changing the summary to "dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()"
> > > > > would be clearer?
> > > >
> > > > Yes that would be better
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 01:36:52AM +0800, Koba Ko wrote:
> > > > > > If the passed client_count is 0,
> > > > > > it would be incremented by balance_ref_count first
> > > > > > then increment one more.
> > > > > > This would cause client_count to 2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use
> > > > > > 2
> > > > > > 2
> > > > > > 2
> > > > >
> > > > > Would this be better?
> > > > >
> > > > >     The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel
> > > > >     client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels,
> > > > >     first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This
> > > > >     results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the
> > > > >     channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple
> > > > >     test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell
> > > > >     Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow
> > > > >     warning.
> > > >
> > > > Agree, also if you have the underflow warning handy, do add it to the
> > > > log
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't know if Canonical saw that in their testing, but that was how our
> > > QE initially found the issue.
> > >
> > > [  124.329662] async_tx: api initialized (async)
> > > [  129.000627] async_tx: api initialized (async)
> > > [  130.047839] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > [  130.052472] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.
> > > [  130.057279] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 19364 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
> > > [  130.065811] Modules linked in: async_tx(-) rfkill intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common amd64_edac edac_mce_amd ipmi_ssif kvm_amd dcdbas kvm mgag200 drm_shmem_helper acpi_ipmi irqbypass drm_kms_helper ipmi_si syscopyarea sysfillrect rapl pcspkr ipmi_devintf sysimgblt fb_sys_fops k10temp i2c_piix4 ipmi_msghandler acpi_power_meter acpi_cpufreq vfat fat drm fuse xfs libcrc32c sd_mod t10_pi sg ahci crct10dif_pclmul libahci crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel igb megaraid_sas i40e libata i2c_algo_bit ccp sp5100_tco dca dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: async_tx]
> > > [  130.117361] CPU: 3 PID: 19364 Comm: modprobe Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.14.0-185.el9.x86_64 #1
> > > [  130.126091] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R7425/02MJ3T, BIOS 1.18.0 01/17/2022
> > > [  130.133806] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110
> > > [  130.139041] Code: 01 01 e8 6d bd 55 00 0f 0b e9 72 9d 8a 00 80 3d 26 18 9c 01 00 75 85 48 c7 c7 f8 a3 03 9d c6 05 16 18 9c 01 01 e8 4a bd 55 00 <0f> 0b e9 4f 9d 8a 00 80 3d 01 18 9c 01 00 0f 85 5e ff ff ff 48 c7
> > > [  130.157807] RSP: 0018:ffffbf98898afe68 EFLAGS: 00010286
> > > [  130.163036] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9da06028e598 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > > [  130.170172] RDX: ffff9daf9de26480 RSI: ffff9daf9de198a0 RDI: ffff9daf9de198a0
> > > [  130.177316] RBP: ffff9da7cddf3970 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffff7fff
> > > [  130.184459] R10: ffffbf98898afd00 R11: ffffffff9d9e8c28 R12: ffff9da7cddf1970
> > > [  130.191596] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> > > [  130.198739] FS:  00007f646435c740(0000) GS:ffff9daf9de00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > > [  130.206832] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > > [  130.212586] CR2: 00007f6463b214f0 CR3: 00000008ab98c000 CR4: 00000000003506e0
> > > [  130.219729] Call Trace:
> > > [  130.222192]  <TASK>
> > > [  130.224305]  dma_chan_put+0x10d/0x110
> > > [  130.227988]  dmaengine_put+0x7a/0xa0
> > > [  130.231575]  __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x178/0x280
> > > [  130.237157]  ? syscall_trace_enter.constprop.0+0x145/0x1d0
> > > [  130.242652]  do_syscall_64+0x5c/0x90
> > > [  130.246240]  ? exc_page_fault+0x62/0x150
> > > [  130.250178]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
> > > [  130.255243] RIP: 0033:0x7f6463a3f5ab
> > > [  130.258830] Code: 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 75 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48 83 c8 ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa b8 b0 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 45 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > > [  130.277591] RSP: 002b:00007fff22f972c8 EFLAGS: 00000206 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000b0
> > > [  130.285164] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 000055b6786edd40 RCX: 00007f6463a3f5ab
> > > [  130.292303] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000800 RDI: 000055b6786edda8
> > > [  130.299443] RBP: 000055b6786edd40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > > [  130.306584] R10: 00007f6463b9eac0 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 000055b6786edda8
> > > [  130.313731] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 000055b6786edda8 R15: 00007fff22f995f8
> > > [  130.320875]  </TASK>
> > > [  130.323081] ---[ end trace eff7156d56b5cf25 ]---
> >
> > This is good, give more details and should be added to log in next
> > iteration
> >
> > --
> > ~Vinod

Re: [PATCH V2] dmaengine: Fix client_count is countered one more incorrectly.

Posted by Joel Savitz 1 year, 6 months ago

Tested-by: Joel Savitz <jsavitz@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Joel Savitz <jsavitz@redhat.com>