On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:02:26PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:49 PM Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Daniel.
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 05:23:58PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > I'm thinking this is the warning that fired in the 0day report, but I
> > > can't double-check yet since 0day didn't upload its source tree
> > > anywhere I can check. And all the drivers I can easily test don't use
> > > drm_dev_alloc anymore ...
> > >
> > > Also if I'm correct supreme amounts of bad luck because usually kslap
> > > (for bigger structures) gives us something quite a bit bigger than
> > > what we asked for.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Fixes: c6603c740e0e ("drm: add managed resources tied to drm_device")
> > > Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_managed.c | 3 +--
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_managed.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_managed.c
> > > index 4955241ceb4c..9cebfe370a65 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_managed.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_managed.c
> > > @@ -139,8 +139,7 @@ void drmm_add_final_kfree(struct drm_device *dev, void *container)
> > > {
> > > WARN_ON(dev->managed.final_kfree);
> > > WARN_ON(dev < (struct drm_device *) container);
> > > - WARN_ON(dev + 1 >=
> > > - (struct drm_device *) (container + ksize(container)));
> > > + WARN_ON(dev + 1 > (struct drm_device *) (container + ksize(container)));
> >
> > I do not think this is the right fix...
> > The original code would trigger if
> > 1) the container only had a drm_device - and nothing else
> > 2) and the allocated size was the same
>
> Yup, which apparently happens for all the drivers calling
> drm_dev_alloc(). At least on the unlucky architecture that 0day tested
> on (or build settings, or whatever). The issue was hit with drm/bochs,
> which is still using drm_dev_alloc (like most older-ish drivers).
That explains it and then the checks makes sense.
Reviewed-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sam
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
