| Message ID | 20240104102616.20120-1-quic_ugoswami@quicinc.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | usb: core: Prevent null pointer dereference in update_port_device_state | expand |
On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 03:56:16PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: > Currently,the function update_port_device_state gets the usb_hub from > udev->parent by calling usb_hub_to_struct_hub. > However, in case the actconfig or the maxchild is 0, the usb_hub would > be NULL and upon further accessing to get port_dev would result in null > pointer dereference. Is this true for any real (or fake) hardware? > > Fix this by introducing an if check after the usb_hub is populated. > > Fixes: 83cb2604f641 ("usb: core: add sysfs entry for usb device state") > Signed-off-by: Udipto Goswami <quic_ugoswami@quicinc.com> Any specific reason you don't want this backported to the stable kernels that include the commit you marked this as a fix for? As my bot says: - You have marked a patch with a "Fixes:" tag for a commit that is in an older released kernel, yet you do not have a cc: stable line in the signed-off-by area at all, which means that the patch will not be applied to any older kernel releases. To properly fix this, please follow the documented rules in the Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file for how to resolve this. thanks, greg k-h
Hi Greg, On 1/4/2024 4:14 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 03:56:16PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: >> Currently,the function update_port_device_state gets the usb_hub from >> udev->parent by calling usb_hub_to_struct_hub. >> However, in case the actconfig or the maxchild is 0, the usb_hub would >> be NULL and upon further accessing to get port_dev would result in null >> pointer dereference. > > Is this true for any real (or fake) hardware? We saw this in our QCOM hardwares where lvstest.c was calling get_dev_desc_store: usb_set_device_state+0x128/0x17c create_lvs_device+0x60/0xf8 [lvstest] get_dev_desc_store+0x94/0x18c [lvstest] dev_attr_store+0x30/0x48 I think the part of the test procedure is to first unbind the hub driver which calls hub_disconnect setting the maxchild = 0. So if after this the dev_attr try to access, it throws the NULL pointer de-reference. > >> >> Fix this by introducing an if check after the usb_hub is populated. >> >> Fixes: 83cb2604f641 ("usb: core: add sysfs entry for usb device state") >> Signed-off-by: Udipto Goswami <quic_ugoswami@quicinc.com> > > Any specific reason you don't want this backported to the stable kernels > that include the commit you marked this as a fix for? > > As my bot says: > > - You have marked a patch with a "Fixes:" tag for a commit that is in an > older released kernel, yet you do not have a cc: stable line in the > signed-off-by area at all, which means that the patch will not be > applied to any older kernel releases. To properly fix this, please > follow the documented rules in the > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file for how to resolve > this. Got it, I'll take care of it in next version. Thanks, -Udipto
On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 06:35:38PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 1/4/2024 4:14 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 03:56:16PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: > > > Currently,the function update_port_device_state gets the usb_hub from > > > udev->parent by calling usb_hub_to_struct_hub. > > > However, in case the actconfig or the maxchild is 0, the usb_hub would > > > be NULL and upon further accessing to get port_dev would result in null > > > pointer dereference. > > > > Is this true for any real (or fake) hardware? > > We saw this in our QCOM hardwares where lvstest.c was calling > get_dev_desc_store: > > usb_set_device_state+0x128/0x17c > create_lvs_device+0x60/0xf8 [lvstest] > get_dev_desc_store+0x94/0x18c [lvstest] > dev_attr_store+0x30/0x48 > > I think the part of the test procedure is to first unbind the hub driver > which calls hub_disconnect setting the maxchild = 0. Are you sure lvstest is correct here? thanks, greg k-h
On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:13:51PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 06:35:38PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > On 1/4/2024 4:14 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 03:56:16PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: > > > > Currently,the function update_port_device_state gets the usb_hub from > > > > udev->parent by calling usb_hub_to_struct_hub. > > > > However, in case the actconfig or the maxchild is 0, the usb_hub would > > > > be NULL and upon further accessing to get port_dev would result in null > > > > pointer dereference. > > > > > > Is this true for any real (or fake) hardware? > > > > We saw this in our QCOM hardwares where lvstest.c was calling > > get_dev_desc_store: > > > > usb_set_device_state+0x128/0x17c > > create_lvs_device+0x60/0xf8 [lvstest] > > get_dev_desc_store+0x94/0x18c [lvstest] > > dev_attr_store+0x30/0x48 > > > > I think the part of the test procedure is to first unbind the hub driver > > which calls hub_disconnect setting the maxchild = 0. > > Are you sure lvstest is correct here? This is what happens when people work behind the hub driver's back. :-( If you can't find another way to fix the problem, you should at least change the patch to include a comment before the "if (hub)" test, explaining why it is necessary. Otherwise somebody in the future will remove the test, because under normal circumstances hub would never be NULL here. Alan Stern
Hi Greg, Alan, On 1/4/2024 8:26 PM, Alan Stern wrote: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:13:51PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 06:35:38PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: >>> Hi Greg, >>> >>> On 1/4/2024 4:14 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 03:56:16PM +0530, Udipto Goswami wrote: >>>>> Currently,the function update_port_device_state gets the usb_hub from >>>>> udev->parent by calling usb_hub_to_struct_hub. >>>>> However, in case the actconfig or the maxchild is 0, the usb_hub would >>>>> be NULL and upon further accessing to get port_dev would result in null >>>>> pointer dereference. >>>> >>>> Is this true for any real (or fake) hardware? >>> >>> We saw this in our QCOM hardwares where lvstest.c was calling >>> get_dev_desc_store: >>> >>> usb_set_device_state+0x128/0x17c >>> create_lvs_device+0x60/0xf8 [lvstest] >>> get_dev_desc_store+0x94/0x18c [lvstest] >>> dev_attr_store+0x30/0x48 >>> >>> I think the part of the test procedure is to first unbind the hub driver >>> which calls hub_disconnect setting the maxchild = 0. >> >> Are you sure lvstest is correct here? By the commit description of lvstest driver this seems to be the procedure: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/drivers/usb/misc/lvstest.c?h=v6.6.9&id=ce21bfe603b3401c258c415456c915634998e133 As you can see it mentions unbind is necessary before further steps carried out. Also, since the test was passing before update_port_device_state was introduced, wasn't doubting this. Either way, usb_hub_to_struct_hub() can potentially return NULL not only for maxchild == 0, but other cases like actconfig == NULL or hdev == NULL as well, so it isn't wise to access the hub in subsequent line. > > This is what happens when people work behind the hub driver's back. :-( > > If you can't find another way to fix the problem, you should at least > change the patch to include a comment before the "if (hub)" test, > explaining why it is necessary. Otherwise somebody in the future will > remove the test, because under normal circumstances hub would never be > NULL here. Thanks for the review Alan. Sure I'll put a comment here stating the necessity of the check for clarity in the next version. I agree under normal conditions this won't fail for example even in this case we unbinded 2-1. Since 1-1 wasn't unbinded that therefore usb1 has a maxchild still present. Thanks, -Udipto
diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c index ffd7c99e24a3..c33ff37159c2 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c @@ -2053,9 +2053,11 @@ static void update_port_device_state(struct usb_device *udev) if (udev->parent) { hub = usb_hub_to_struct_hub(udev->parent); - port_dev = hub->ports[udev->portnum - 1]; - WRITE_ONCE(port_dev->state, udev->state); - sysfs_notify_dirent(port_dev->state_kn); + if (hub) { + port_dev = hub->ports[udev->portnum - 1]; + WRITE_ONCE(port_dev->state, udev->state); + sysfs_notify_dirent(port_dev->state_kn); + } } }
Currently,the function update_port_device_state gets the usb_hub from udev->parent by calling usb_hub_to_struct_hub. However, in case the actconfig or the maxchild is 0, the usb_hub would be NULL and upon further accessing to get port_dev would result in null pointer dereference. Fix this by introducing an if check after the usb_hub is populated. Fixes: 83cb2604f641 ("usb: core: add sysfs entry for usb device state") Signed-off-by: Udipto Goswami <quic_ugoswami@quicinc.com> --- drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)