lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [syzbot] WARNING in do_proc_control/usb_submit_urb
    On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:00:04AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
    > On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 09:07:09AM -0700, syzbot wrote:
    > > Hello,
    > >
    > > syzbot has tested the proposed patch but the reproducer is still triggering an issue:
    > > WARNING in do_proc_control/usb_submit_urb
    > >
    > > ------------[ cut here ]------------
    > > usb usb2: BOGUS control dir, pipe 80000180 doesn't match bRequestType 80
    > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 10164 at drivers/usb/core/urb.c:410 usb_submit_urb+0x149d/0x18a0 drivers/usb/core/urb.c:410
    > > Modules linked in:
    > > CPU: 1 PID: 10164 Comm: syz-executor.2 Tainted: G W 5.13.0-next-20210707-syzkaller #0
    > > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 01/01/2011
    > > RIP: 0010:usb_submit_urb+0x149d/0x18a0 drivers/usb/core/urb.c:410
    > > Code: 7c 24 40 e8 45 1e 20 fc 48 8b 7c 24 40 e8 6b 40 0c ff 45 89 e8 44 89 f1 4c 89 e2 48 89 c6 48 c7 c7 a0 99 27 8a e8 5a a4 91 03 <0f> 0b e9 a5 ee ff ff e8 17 1e 20 fc 0f b6 1d 21 86 02 08 31 ff 41
    > > RSP: 0018:ffffc9000a33f9a8 EFLAGS: 00010286
    > > RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff8881468f1058 RCX: 0000000000000000
    > > RDX: ffff88802a830000 RSI: ffffffff815d7735 RDI: fffff52001467f27
    > > RBP: ffff888142fe0578 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
    > > R10: ffffffff815d156e R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff888146811500
    > > R13: 0000000000000080 R14: 0000000080000180 R15: ffff8880135f2700
    > > FS: 00007f1b9bc83700(0000) GS:ffff8880b9d00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
    > > CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
    > > CR2: 00007ffcfa7f3720 CR3: 000000003de67000 CR4: 00000000001506e0
    > > DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
    > > DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
    > > Call Trace:
    > > usb_start_wait_urb+0x101/0x4c0 drivers/usb/core/message.c:58
    > > usb_internal_control_msg drivers/usb/core/message.c:102 [inline]
    > > usb_control_msg+0x31c/0x4a0 drivers/usb/core/message.c:153
    > > do_proc_control+0x6c4/0x920 drivers/usb/core/devio.c:1141
    > > proc_control drivers/usb/core/devio.c:1191 [inline]
    > > usbdev_do_ioctl drivers/usb/core/devio.c:2540 [inline]
    > > usbdev_ioctl+0x10e2/0x36c0 drivers/usb/core/devio.c:2713
    >
    > I don't get this. It shouldn't be possible. The fact that the
    > direction bit is set in both bRequestType and pipe means that the URB
    > was submitted as a control-IN but had length 0. But the patch addresses
    > exactly that case:
    >
    > --- usb-devel.orig/drivers/usb/core/devio.c
    > +++ usb-devel/drivers/usb/core/devio.c
    > @@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ static int do_proc_control(struct usb_de
    > "wIndex=%04x wLength=%04x\n",
    > ctrl->bRequestType, ctrl->bRequest, ctrl->wValue,
    > ctrl->wIndex, ctrl->wLength);
    > - if (ctrl->bRequestType & 0x80) {
    > + if ((ctrl->bRequestType & USB_DIR_IN) && ctrl->wLength) {
    > pipe = usb_rcvctrlpipe(dev, 0);
    > snoop_urb(dev, NULL, pipe, ctrl->wLength, tmo, SUBMIT, NULL, 0);
    >
    > and causes the kernel to handle it as a control-OUT instead.
    >
    > Johan, any ideas?

    Did syzbot actually test the patch? I can't see how the direction bit of
    the pipe argument can be set with the above applied either.

    Johan

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2021-07-12 17:30    [W:3.824 / U:0.864 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site