lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] PCI: hv: Fix panic by calling hv_pci_remove_slots() earlier
Hi Dexuan,

The subject line only describes the mechanical code change, which is
obvious from the patch. It would be better if we could say something
about *why* we need this.

On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 01:32:28AM +0000, Dexuan Cui wrote:
>
> When a slot is removed, the pci_dev must still exist.
>
> pci_remove_root_bus() removes and free all the pci_devs, so
> hv_pci_remove_slots() must be called before pci_remove_root_bus(),
> otherwise a general protection fault can happen, if the kernel is built

"general protection fault" is an x86 term that doesn't really say what
the issue is. I suspect this would be a "use-after-free" problem.

> with the memory debugging options.
>
> Fixes: 15becc2b56c6 ("PCI: hv: Add hv_pci_remove_slots() when we unload the driver")
> Signed-off-by: Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>
> ---
>
> When pci-hyperv is unloaded, this panic can happen:
>
> general protection fault:
> CPU: 2 PID: 1091 Comm: rmmod Not tainted 5.2.0+
> RIP: 0010:pci_slot_release+0x30/0xd0
> Call Trace:
> kobject_release+0x65/0x190
> pci_destroy_slot+0x25/0x60
> hv_pci_remove+0xec/0x110 [pci_hyperv]
> vmbus_remove+0x20/0x30 [hv_vmbus]
> device_release_driver_internal+0xd5/0x1b0
> driver_detach+0x44/0x7c
> bus_remove_driver+0x75/0xc7
> vmbus_driver_unregister+0x50/0xbd [hv_vmbus]
> __x64_sys_delete_module+0x136/0x200
> do_syscall_64+0x5e/0x220
>
> drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c
> index 6b9cc6e60a..68c611d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c
> @@ -2757,8 +2757,8 @@ static int hv_pci_remove(struct hv_device *hdev)
> /* Remove the bus from PCI's point of view. */
> pci_lock_rescan_remove();
> pci_stop_root_bus(hbus->pci_bus);
> - pci_remove_root_bus(hbus->pci_bus);
> hv_pci_remove_slots(hbus);
> + pci_remove_root_bus(hbus->pci_bus);

I'm curious about why we need hv_pci_remove_slots() at all. None of
the other callers of pci_stop_root_bus() and pci_remove_root_bus() do
anything similar to hv_pci_remove_slots().

Surely some of those callers also support slots, so there must be some
other path that calls pci_destroy_slot() in those cases. Can we use a
similar strategy here?

> pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
> hbus->state = hv_pcibus_removed;
> }
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-02 21:42    [W:0.103 / U:2.972 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site