lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] TPM: Close data_pending and data_buffer races
On 06/12/11 16:29, Tim Gardner wrote:
> There is a race betwen tpm_read() and tpm_write where both chip->data_pending
> and chip->data_buffer can be changed by tpm_write() when tpm_read()
> clears chip->data_pending, but before tpm_read() grabs the mutex.
>
> Protect changes to chip->data_pending and chip->data_buffer by expanding
> the scope of chip->buffer_mutex.
>
> Reported-by: Seth Forshee<seth.forshee@canonical.com>
> Cc: Debora Velarde<debora@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Rajiv Andrade<srajiv@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Marcel Selhorst<m.selhorst@sirrix.com>
> Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Tim Gardner<tim.gardner@canonical.com>
> ---
> drivers/char/tpm/tpm.c | 17 +++++++++--------
> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.c
> index b366b34..70bf9e5 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.c
> @@ -1074,12 +1074,15 @@ ssize_t tpm_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> struct tpm_chip *chip = file->private_data;
> size_t in_size = size, out_size;
>
> + mutex_lock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> +
> /* cannot perform a write until the read has cleared
> either via tpm_read or a user_read_timer timeout */
> - while (atomic_read(&chip->data_pending) != 0)
> + while (atomic_read(&chip->data_pending) != 0) {
> + mutex_unlock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT);
> -
> - mutex_lock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> + mutex_lock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> + }
>
> if (in_size> TPM_BUFSIZE)
> in_size = TPM_BUFSIZE;
> @@ -1112,22 +1115,20 @@ ssize_t tpm_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
>
> del_singleshot_timer_sync(&chip->user_read_timer);
> flush_work_sync(&chip->work);
> - ret_size = atomic_read(&chip->data_pending);
> - atomic_set(&chip->data_pending, 0);
> + mutex_lock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> + ret_size = atomic_xchg(&chip->data_pending, 0);
> if (ret_size> 0) { /* relay data */
> ssize_t orig_ret_size = ret_size;
> if (size< ret_size)
> ret_size = size;
>
> - mutex_lock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> rc = copy_to_user(buf, chip->data_buffer, ret_size);
> memset(chip->data_buffer, 0, orig_ret_size);
> if (rc)
> ret_size = -EFAULT;

What about just moving atomic_set(&chip->data_pending, 0); to here?
If I'm not missing anything, this would be cleaner.

Rajiv
> -
> - mutex_unlock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> }
>
> + mutex_unlock(&chip->buffer_mutex);
> return ret_size;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tpm_read);



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-20 17:41    [W:1.064 / U:0.388 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site