On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 10:55 PM Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 10:12:02PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 2024/11/29 18:51, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 05:58:31PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > > > > Revisiting this thread since I just stepped on the same problem on a > > > > different device. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 9:12 PM Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 10:53:49PM +0800, Fei Shao wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 8:36 PM Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 01:23:31PM +0800, Fei Shao wrote: > > > > > > > > In the mtk_dsi driver, its DSI host attach callback calls > > > > > > > > devm_drm_of_get_bridge() to get the next bridge. If that next bridge is > > > > > > > > a panel bridge, a panel_bridge object is allocated and managed by the > > > > > > > > panel device. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Later, if the attach callback fails with -EPROBE_DEFER from subsequent > > > > > > > > component_add(), the panel device invoking the callback at probe time > > > > > > > > also fails, and all device-managed resources are freed accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This exposes a drm_bridge bridge_list corruption due to the unbalanced > > > > > > > > lifecycle between the DSI host and the panel devices: the panel_bridge > > > > > > > > object managed by panel device is freed, while drm_bridge_remove() is > > > > > > > > bound to DSI host device and never gets called. > > > > > > > > The next drm_bridge_add() will trigger UAF against the freed bridge list > > > > > > > > object and result in kernel panic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This bug is observed on a MediaTek MT8188-based Chromebook with MIPI DSI > > > > > > > > outputting to a DSI panel (DT is WIP for upstream). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As a fix, using devm_drm_bridge_add() with the panel device in the panel > > > > > > > > path seems reasonable. This also implies a chain of potential cleanup > > > > > > > > actions: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Removing drm_bridge_remove() means devm_drm_panel_bridge_release() > > > > > > > > becomes hollow and can be removed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. devm_drm_panel_bridge_add_typed() is almost emptied except for the > > > > > > > > `bridge->pre_enable_prev_first` line. Itself can be also removed if > > > > > > > > we move the line into drm_panel_bridge_add_typed(). (maybe?) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. drm_panel_bridge_add_typed() now calls all the needed devm_* calls, > > > > > > > > so it's essentially the new devm_drm_panel_bridge_add_typed(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. drmm_panel_bridge_add() needs to be updated accordingly since it > > > > > > > > calls drm_panel_bridge_add_typed(). But now there's only one bridge > > > > > > > > object to be freed, and it's already being managed by panel device. > > > > > > > > I wonder if we still need both drmm_ and devm_ version in this case. > > > > > > > > (maybe yes from DRM PoV, I don't know much about the context) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a RFC patch since I'm not sure if my understanding is correct > > > > > > > > (for both the fix and the cleanup). It fixes the issue I encountered, > > > > > > > > but I don't expect it to be picked up directly due to the redundant > > > > > > > > commit message and the dangling devm_drm_panel_bridge_release(). > > > > > > > > I plan to resend the official patch(es) once I know what I supposed to > > > > > > > > do next. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For reference, here's the KASAN report from the device: > > > > > > > > ================================================================== > > > > > > > > BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in drm_bridge_add+0x98/0x230 > > > > > > > > Read of size 8 at addr ffffff80c4e9e100 by task kworker/u32:1/69 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 69 Comm: kworker/u32:1 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc1-next-20241004-kasan-00030-g062135fa4046 #1 > > > > > > > > Hardware name: Google Ciri sku0/unprovisioned board (DT) > > > > > > > > Workqueue: events_unbound deferred_probe_work_func > > > > > > > > Call trace: > > > > > > > > dump_backtrace+0xfc/0x140 > > > > > > > > show_stack+0x24/0x38 > > > > > > > > dump_stack_lvl+0x40/0xc8 > > > > > > > > print_report+0x140/0x700 > > > > > > > > kasan_report+0xcc/0x130 > > > > > > > > __asan_report_load8_noabort+0x20/0x30 > > > > > > > > drm_bridge_add+0x98/0x230 > > > > > > > > devm_drm_panel_bridge_add_typed+0x174/0x298 > > > > > > > > devm_drm_of_get_bridge+0xe8/0x190 > > > > > > > > mtk_dsi_host_attach+0x130/0x2b0 > > > > > > > > mipi_dsi_attach+0x8c/0xe8 > > > > > > > > hx83102_probe+0x1a8/0x368 > > > > > > > > mipi_dsi_drv_probe+0x6c/0x88 > > > > > > > > really_probe+0x1c4/0x698 > > > > > > > > __driver_probe_device+0x160/0x298 > > > > > > > > driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x2a8 > > > > > > > > __device_attach_driver+0x2a0/0x398 > > > > > > > > bus_for_each_drv+0x198/0x200 > > > > > > > > __device_attach+0x1c0/0x308 > > > > > > > > device_initial_probe+0x20/0x38 > > > > > > > > bus_probe_device+0x11c/0x1f8 > > > > > > > > deferred_probe_work_func+0x80/0x250 > > > > > > > > worker_thread+0x9b4/0x2780 > > > > > > > > kthread+0x274/0x350 > > > > > > > > ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Allocated by task 69: > > > > > > > > kasan_save_track+0x40/0x78 > > > > > > > > kasan_save_alloc_info+0x44/0x58 > > > > > > > > __kasan_kmalloc+0x84/0xa0 > > > > > > > > __kmalloc_node_track_caller_noprof+0x228/0x450 > > > > > > > > devm_kmalloc+0x6c/0x288 > > > > > > > > devm_drm_panel_bridge_add_typed+0xa0/0x298 > > > > > > > > devm_drm_of_get_bridge+0xe8/0x190 > > > > > > > > mtk_dsi_host_attach+0x130/0x2b0 > > > > > > > > mipi_dsi_attach+0x8c/0xe8 > > > > > > > > hx83102_probe+0x1a8/0x368 > > > > > > > > mipi_dsi_drv_probe+0x6c/0x88 > > > > > > > > really_probe+0x1c4/0x698 > > > > > > > > __driver_probe_device+0x160/0x298 > > > > > > > > driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x2a8 > > > > > > > > __device_attach_driver+0x2a0/0x398 > > > > > > > > bus_for_each_drv+0x198/0x200 > > > > > > > > __device_attach+0x1c0/0x308 > > > > > > > > device_initial_probe+0x20/0x38 > > > > > > > > bus_probe_device+0x11c/0x1f8 > > > > > > > > deferred_probe_work_func+0x80/0x250 > > > > > > > > worker_thread+0x9b4/0x2780 > > > > > > > > kthread+0x274/0x350 > > > > > > > > ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Freed by task 69: > > > > > > > > kasan_save_track+0x40/0x78 > > > > > > > > kasan_save_free_info+0x58/0x78 > > > > > > > > __kasan_slab_free+0x48/0x68 > > > > > > > > kfree+0xd4/0x750 > > > > > > > > devres_release_all+0x144/0x1e8 > > > > > > > > really_probe+0x48c/0x698 > > > > > > > > __driver_probe_device+0x160/0x298 > > > > > > > > driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x2a8 > > > > > > > > __device_attach_driver+0x2a0/0x398 > > > > > > > > bus_for_each_drv+0x198/0x200 > > > > > > > > __device_attach+0x1c0/0x308 > > > > > > > > device_initial_probe+0x20/0x38 > > > > > > > > bus_probe_device+0x11c/0x1f8 > > > > > > > > deferred_probe_work_func+0x80/0x250 > > > > > > > > worker_thread+0x9b4/0x2780 > > > > > > > > kthread+0x274/0x350 > > > > > > > > ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The buggy address belongs to the object at ffffff80c4e9e000 > > > > > > > > which belongs to the cache kmalloc-4k of size 4096 > > > > > > > > The buggy address is located 256 bytes inside of > > > > > > > > freed 4096-byte region [ffffff80c4e9e000, ffffff80c4e9f000) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The buggy address belongs to the physical page: > > > > > > > > head: order:3 mapcount:0 entire_mapcount:0 nr_pages_mapped:0 pincount:0 > > > > > > > > flags: 0x8000000000000040(head|zone=2) > > > > > > > > page_type: f5(slab) > > > > > > > > page: refcount:1 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > index:0x0 pfn:0x104e98 > > > > > > > > raw: 8000000000000040 ffffff80c0003040 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000040004 00000001f5000000 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > head: 8000000000000040 ffffff80c0003040 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > head: 0000000000000000 0000000000040004 00000001f5000000 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > head: 8000000000000003 fffffffec313a601 ffffffffffffffff 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > head: 0000000000000008 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory state around the buggy address: > > > > > > > > ffffff80c4e9e000: fa fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb > > > > > > > > ffffff80c4e9e080: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb > > > > > > > > >ffffff80c4e9e100: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb > > > > > > > > ^ > > > > > > > > ffffff80c4e9e180: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb > > > > > > > > ffffff80c4e9e200: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb > > > > > > > > =================================================================== > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Fei Shao <fshao@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > I was looking at the driver to try to follow your (awesome btw, thanks) > > > > > > > commit log, and it does have a quite different structure compared to > > > > > > > what we recommend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would following > > > > > > > https://docs.kernel.org/gpu/drm-kms-helpers.html#special-care-with-mipi-dsi-bridges > > > > > > > help? > > > > > > Hi Maxime, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the pointer. > > > > > > I read the suggested pattern in the doc and compared it with the > > > > > > drivers. If I understand correctly, both the MIPI-DSI host and panel > > > > > > drivers follow the instructions: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The MIPI-DSI host driver must run mipi_dsi_host_register() in its probe hook. > > > > > > >> drm/mediatek/mtk_dsi.c runs mipi_dsi_host_register() in the probe hook. > > > > > > 2. In its probe hook, the bridge driver must try to find its MIPI-DSI > > > > > > host, register as a MIPI-DSI device and attach the MIPI-DSI device to > > > > > > its host. > > > > > > >> drm/panel/panel-himax-hx83102.c follows and runs > > > > > > mipi_dsi_attach() at the end of probe hook. > > > > > > 3. In its struct mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach hook, the MIPI-DSI host can > > > > > > now add its component. > > > > > > >> drm/mediatek/mtk_dsi.c calls component_add() in the attach callback. > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you elaborate on the "different structures" you mentioned? > > > > > Yeah, you're right, sorry. > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify my point: the issue is that component_add() may return > > > > > > -EPROBE_DEFER if the component (e.g. DSI encoder) is not ready, > > > > > > causing the panel bridge to be removed. However, drm_bridge_remove() > > > > > > is bound to MIPI-DSI host instead of panel bridge, which owns the > > > > > > actual list_head object. > > > > > > > > > > > > This might be reproducible with other MIPI-DSI host + panel > > > > > > combinations by forcibly returning -EPROBE_DEFER in the host attach > > > > > > hook (verification with another device is needed), so the fix may be > > > > > > required in drm/bridge/panel.c. > > > > > Yeah, I think you're just hitting another bridge lifetime issue, and > > > > > it's not the only one unfortunately. Tying the bridge structure lifetime > > > > > itself to the device is wrong, it should be tied to the DRM device > > > > > lifetime instead. > > > > I think the more immediate issue is that the bridge object's lifetime > > > > and drm_bridge_add/remove are inconsistent when devm_drm_of_get_bridge() > > > > or drmm_of_get_bridge() are used. > > > > > > > > These helpers tie the bridge add/removal to the device or drm_device > > > > passed in, but internally they call down to drm_panel_bridge_add_typed() > > > > which allocates the bridge object tied to the panel device. > > > > > But then, the discussion becomes that bridges typically probe outside of > > > > > the "main" DRM device probe path, so you don't have access to the DRM > > > > > device structure until attach at best. > > > > > > > > > > That's why I'm a bit skeptical about your patch. It might workaround > > > > > your issue, but it doesn't actually solve the problem. I guess the best > > > > > way about it would be to convert bridges to reference counting, with the > > > > > device taking a reference at probe time when it allocates the structure > > > > > (and giving it back at remove time), and the DRM device taking one when > > > > > it's attached and one when it's detached. > > > > Without going as far, it's probably better to align the lifecycle of > > > > the two parts. Most other bridge drivers in the kernel have |drm_bridge| > > > > lifecycle tied to their underlying |device|, either with explicit > > > > drm_bridge_{add,remove}() calls in their probe/bind and remove/unbind > > > > callbacks respectively, or with devm_drm_bridge_add in the probe/bind > > > > path. The only ones with a narrower lifecycle are the DSI hosts, which > > > > add the bridge in during host attach and remove it during host detach. > > > > > > > > I'm thinking about fixing the panel_bridge lifecycle such that it is > > > > tied to the panel itself. Maybe that would involve making > > > > devm_drm_of_get_bridge() correctly return bridges even if a panel was > > > > found, and then making the panels create and add panel bridges directly, > > > > possibly within drm_panel_add(). Would that make sense? > > > Not really. > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > Or rather, it doesn't fix the root cause that is that tieing > > > the bridge lifetime to the device is wrong. Well, yeah, but at least it aligns the panel_bridge case with every other bridge driver: the bridge object and its duration existing in the list of bridges are the same in every other bridge driver. The bridge driver allocates the bridge object in its probe function (with devm or not), and adds the bridge to the global list as probably the last step of the probe function. In the remove function the reverse is done. Right now for the panel bridge, the bridge object is allocated with its lifetime tied to the panel, but the adding and removing of the bridge to/from the global list is tied to the caller of the panel_bridge API, likely the previous bridge or encoder in the chain. This is what is blowing up for us, right now, with the Ciri Chromebooks. If we fix this bit, then at least it reduces the problem to be only as worse as the other bridge drivers. I think MediaTek is currently the only platform that hits this because it probably is the only platform that has dual display pipelines with bridges and panel bridges, with one of the pipelines being MIPI DSI. That's not to say another platform, such as Rockchip, wouldn't hit it if similar devices were produced. > > This is multiple kernel driver module probe issue, not an issue > > about bridge's lifetime. > > > > > > The life time of the bridge of an 'struct panel_bridge' has > > been tied to the 'panel->dev' since 2017 [1]. > > > > See commit 13dfc0540a575b47b2d640b093ac16e9e09474f6 > > ("drm/bridge: Refactor out the panel wrapper from the lvds-encoder bridge.") > > > > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/159673/ > > Yeah, and it's been wrong since 2017. > > > > It needs to be tied to the DRM device somehow. > > > > Why? > > Because the DRM device is only free'd when the last userspace > application has closed it's FD to it, which might much later than the > device being removed. So if we tie that to the device lifetime, and the > device goes away, we have a dangling pointer and potential > use-after-free issue if the application continues to access its fd. > > > It's the underlying hardware device backing the bridge, if the > > backing hardware device has been freed, How does the bound drm > > bridge driver could continue to work? > > Using drm_dev_enter/drm_dev_exit. > > > How could the dangling pointer stored in the bridge_list still > > will make sense? > > It's dangling only if the bridge has been free'd while still having a > pointer to it. If you have a reference counted allocation, it's not > dangling anymore. > > > The imx-lcdif could instantiate three DRM driver, which one > > should be selected as the "main" DRM device to attach? > > The one the bridge attaches to? > > > No, It is messy since day 0. And has been made worse since 2017, > > from then, thedevm_drm_panel_bridge_add() [2] was initially introduced. > > Which allow us to abuse the lifetime of bridge to a different device or (any > > device). > > I agree it's messy. I'm sure you'd agree that we do not want to make the > situation any messier. > > > Maxime's patch just follow this way, but if the caller side > > wise enough to refuse to use those helper, we should be still > > safe. That why I suggest ChenYu to inline and with a little bit > > revise. > > Hi! I'm that Maxime. And it was indeed a mistake in hindsight. > > Maxime > > > [2] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/167666/ > > > > [3] > > https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20210910130941.1740182-2-maxime@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > Your suggestion might indeed work around your issue, > > > > To be clear, the mentioned problem in this thread is caused > > by deferral probe. We should remove the dangling pointer > > stored in the bridge_list, This is just something similar to > > the fault cleanup or error handling, Right? > > > > But the fundamental thing is that the issue is happened in > > the deferral probe context. > > The context doesn't matter here. > > > > but it doesn't fix the actual problem. > > > > If drm bridge still have lifetime related issue, then it is > > yet an another problem. Which should be then orthogonal to > > this one. Then, it should deserve an another fix. > > No, it's absolutely the same one: bridges should be refcounted, they > aren't, it's a mess. I agree that the bridge lifecycle is a mess (and panels are probably the same). What we're trying to fix here is related, but not exactly the same, as explained above. Can we at least fix this bit? ChenYu
