Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Nov 2023 18:39:46 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] nfc: virtual_ncidev: Add variable to check if ndev is running | From | Nguyen Dinh Phi <> |
| |
On 20/11/23 5:06 pm, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 20/11/2023 05:47, Bongsu Jeon wrote: >> >> On 20/11/2023 01:47, Nguyen Dinh Phi wrote: >> >>> syzbot reported an memory leak that happens when an skb is add to >>> send_buff after virtual nci closed. >>> This patch adds a variable to track if the ndev is running before >>> handling new skb in send function. >>> >>> Reported-by: syzbot+6eb09d75211863f15e3e@syzkaller.appspotmail.com >>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/00000000000075472b06007df4fb@google.com >>> Signed-off-by: Nguyen Dinh Phi <phind.uet@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/nfc/virtual_ncidev.c | 9 +++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/nfc/virtual_ncidev.c b/drivers/nfc/virtual_ncidev.c >>> index b027be0b0b6f..ac8226db54e2 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/nfc/virtual_ncidev.c >>> +++ b/drivers/nfc/virtual_ncidev.c >>> @@ -20,26 +20,31 @@ >>> NFC_PROTO_ISO14443_MASK | \ >>> NFC_PROTO_ISO14443_B_MASK | \ >>> NFC_PROTO_ISO15693_MASK) >>> +#define NCIDEV_RUNNING 0 >> This define isn't used. >> >>> >>> struct virtual_nci_dev { >>> struct nci_dev *ndev; >>> struct mutex mtx; >>> struct sk_buff *send_buff; >>> struct wait_queue_head wq; >>> + bool running; >>> }; >>> >>> static int virtual_nci_open(struct nci_dev *ndev) >>> { >>> + struct virtual_nci_dev *vdev = nci_get_drvdata(ndev); >>> + >>> + vdev->running = true; >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> static int virtual_nci_close(struct nci_dev *ndev) >>> { >>> struct virtual_nci_dev *vdev = nci_get_drvdata(ndev); >>> - >>> mutex_lock(&vdev->mtx); >>> kfree_skb(vdev->send_buff); >>> vdev->send_buff = NULL; >>> + vdev->running = false; >>> mutex_unlock(&vdev->mtx); >>> >>> return 0; >>> @@ -50,7 +55,7 @@ static int virtual_nci_send(struct nci_dev *ndev, struct sk_buff *skb) >>> struct virtual_nci_dev *vdev = nci_get_drvdata(ndev); >>> >>> mutex_lock(&vdev->mtx); >>> - if (vdev->send_buff) { >>> + if (vdev->send_buff || !vdev->running) { >> >> Dear Krzysztof, >> >> I agree this defensive code. >> But i think NFC submodule has to avoid this situation.(calling send function of closed nci_dev) >> Could you check this? > > This code looks not effective. At this point vdev->send_buff is always > false, so the additional check would not bring any value. > > I don't see this fixing anything. Syzbot also does not seem to agree. > > Nguyen, please test your patches against syzbot *before* sending them. > If you claim this fixes the report, please provide me the link to syzbot > test results confirming it is fixed. > > I looked at syzbot dashboard and do not see this issue fixed with this > patch. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
Hi Krzysztof,
I've submitted it to syzbot, it is the test request that created at [2023/11/20 09:39] in dashboard link https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=6eb09d75211863f15e3e
Best regards, Phi
| |