lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] arch_topology: Sanity check cpumask in thermal pressure update
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 10:56:12AM -0800, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> Occasionally during boot the Qualcomm cpufreq driver was able to cause
> an invalid memory access in topology_update_thermal_pressure() on the
> line:
>
> if (max_freq <= capped_freq)
>
> It turns out that this was caused by a race, which resulted in the
> cpumask passed to the function being empty, in which case
> cpumask_first() will return a cpu beyond the number of valid cpus, which
> when used to access the per_cpu max_freq would return invalid pointer.
>
> The bug in the Qualcomm cpufreq driver is being fixed, but having a
> sanity check of the arguments would have saved quite a bit of time and
> it's not unlikely that others will run into the same issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> index 976154140f0b..6560a0c3b969 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> @@ -177,6 +177,9 @@ void topology_update_thermal_pressure(const struct cpumask *cpus,
> u32 max_freq;
> int cpu;
>
> + if (WARN_ON(cpumask_empty(cpus)))
> + return;
> +

Why can't the caller check and call this only when cpus is not empty ?
IIUC there are many such APIs that use cpumask and could result in similar
issues if called with empty cpus. Probably we could add a note that cpus
must not be empty if that helps the callers ?

--
Regards,
Sudeep

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-01-19 15:45    [W:0.073 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site