lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH] x86/microcode/amd: Add __list_del_entry_valid() in front of __list_del() in free_cache()
Date
Directly use __list_del() to remove 'p->plist' might be unsafe,
as we can see from the __list_del_entry_valid() of 'lib/list_debug.c'
that p->plist->prev or p->plist->next may be the LIST_POISON,
or p->list is not a valid double list.
In that case, __list_del() will be corruption.
Therefore, we suggest that __list_del_entry_valid()
should be added in front of the __list_del() in free_cache.

Fixes: bad5fa6 ("x86, microcode: Move to a proper location")
Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index 3d4a483..e589cff 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -626,6 +626,8 @@ static void free_cache(void)
struct ucode_patch *p, *tmp;

list_for_each_entry_safe(p, tmp, &microcode_cache, plist) {
+ if (!__list_del_entry_valid(&p->plist))
+ continue;
__list_del(p->plist.prev, p->plist.next);
kfree(p->data);
kfree(p);
--
2.7.4
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-09-28 11:05    [W:0.039 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site