drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_qp.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
commit b2b1ddc457458fecd1c6f385baa9fbda5f0c63ad upstream.
In the function rxe_create_qp(), rxe_qp_from_init() is called to
initialize qp, internally things like rxe_init_task are not setup until
rxe_qp_init_req().
If an error occurred before this point then the unwind will call
rxe_cleanup() and eventually to rxe_qp_do_cleanup()/rxe_cleanup_task()
which will oops when trying to access the uninitialized spinlock.
If rxe_init_task is not executed, rxe_cleanup_task will not be called.
Reported-by: syzbot+cfcc1a3c85be15a40cba@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=fd85757b74b3eb59f904138486f755f71e090df8
Fixes: 8700e3e7c485 ("Soft RoCE driver")
Fixes: 2d4b21e0a291 ("IB/rxe: Prevent from completer to operate on non valid QP")
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230413101115.1366068-1-yanjun.zhu@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Vladislav Nikolaev <vlad102nikolaev@gmail.com>
---
Backport fix for CVE-2023-54028
drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_qp.c | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_qp.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_qp.c
index 13b237d93a61..687d4419388f 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_qp.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_qp.c
@@ -785,8 +785,11 @@ void rxe_qp_destroy(struct rxe_qp *qp)
del_timer_sync(&qp->rnr_nak_timer);
}
- rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->req.task);
- rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->comp.task);
+ if (qp->req.task.func)
+ rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->req.task);
+
+ if (qp->comp.task.func)
+ rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->comp.task);
/* flush out any receive wr's or pending requests */
if (qp->req.task.func)
--
2.47.3
On Mon, 01. Jun 13:52, Vladislav Nikolaev wrote: > @@ -785,8 +785,11 @@ void rxe_qp_destroy(struct rxe_qp *qp) > del_timer_sync(&qp->rnr_nak_timer); > } > > - rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->req.task); > - rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->comp.task); > + if (qp->req.task.func) > + rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->req.task); > + > + if (qp->comp.task.func) > + rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->comp.task); > > /* flush out any receive wr's or pending requests */ > if (qp->req.task.func) There is another rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->resp.task); call at the start of rxe_qp_destroy() in 5.10/5.15 kernels. Should that be taken into account as well, like in upstream commit?
On Mon, 1 Jun 2026 at 06:59:11 -0700, Fedor Pchelkin wrote: > There is another > > rxe_cleanup_task(&qp->resp.task); > > call at the start of rxe_qp_destroy() in 5.10/5.15 kernels. Should that > be taken into account as well, like in upstream commit? Thanks for the review. Yes, you are right. I have sent v2 which takes the responder task cleanup into account by matching the upstream cleanup order and adding the missing qp->resp.task.func check.
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.