Re: [RFC PATCH] drm/bridge: panel: Use devm_drm_bridge_add()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On 2024/12/2 22:57, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 11:16:50PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
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.
It also creates a harmful function in the framework, and thus technical
debt that we will have to deal with eventually. It's pretty clear that
you don't want to fix it properly, but at the very least we shouldn't
pile on more technical debt in the framework.

Anyway, you both seem to have decided I'm wrong,


Hmm, I merely meant that your instruction is an another approach, may need
a large commits to all drm bridges and drm panels though.


so go ahead anyway you
see fit.

Maxime

--
Best regards,
Sui




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux