Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Inside print_request(), we query the context/timeline name. Nothing
> immediately protects the context from being freed if the request is
> complete -- we rely on serialisation by the caller to keep the name
> valid until they finish using it. Inside intel_engine_dump(), we
> generally only print the requsts in the execution queue protected by the
requests
> engine->active.lock, but we also show the pending execlists ports which
> are not protected and so require an rcu_read_lock to keep the pointer
> valid.
s/an/a ?
>
> [ 1695.700883] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in i915_fence_get_timeline_name+0x53/0x90 [i915]
> [ 1695.700981] Read of size 8 at addr ffff8887344f4d50 by task gem_ctx_persist/2968
> [ 1695.701068]
> [ 1695.701156] CPU: 1 PID: 2968 Comm: gem_ctx_persist Tainted: G U 5.4.0-rc6+ #331
> [ 1695.701246] Hardware name: Intel Corporation NUC7i5BNK/NUC7i5BNB, BIOS BNKBL357.86A.0052.2017.0918.1346 09/18/2017
> [ 1695.701334] Call Trace:
> [ 1695.701424] dump_stack+0x5b/0x90
> [ 1695.701870] ? i915_fence_get_timeline_name+0x53/0x90 [i915]
> [ 1695.701964] print_address_description.constprop.7+0x36/0x50
> [ 1695.702408] ? i915_fence_get_timeline_name+0x53/0x90 [i915]
> [ 1695.702856] ? i915_fence_get_timeline_name+0x53/0x90 [i915]
> [ 1695.702947] __kasan_report.cold.10+0x1a/0x3a
> [ 1695.703390] ? i915_fence_get_timeline_name+0x53/0x90 [i915]
> [ 1695.703836] i915_fence_get_timeline_name+0x53/0x90 [i915]
> [ 1695.704241] print_request+0x82/0x2e0 [i915]
> [ 1695.704638] ? fwtable_read32+0x133/0x360 [i915]
> [ 1695.705042] ? write_timestamp+0x110/0x110 [i915]
> [ 1695.705133] ? _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x79/0xc0
> [ 1695.705221] ? refcount_inc_not_zero_checked+0x91/0x110
> [ 1695.705306] ? refcount_dec_and_mutex_lock+0x50/0x50
> [ 1695.705709] ? intel_engine_find_active_request+0x202/0x230 [i915]
> [ 1695.706115] intel_engine_dump+0x2c9/0x900 [i915]
>
> Fixes: c36eebd9ba5d ("drm/i915/gt: execlists->active is serialised by the tasklet")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
> index bf20305a1083..b9613d044393 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
> @@ -1373,6 +1373,7 @@ static void intel_engine_print_registers(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
> }
>
> execlists_active_lock_bh(execlists);
> + rcu_read_lock();
For me there is temptation to push the rcu protection
into the active lock and remove the _bh from the name.
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> for (port = execlists->active; (rq = *port); port++) {
> char hdr[80];
> int len;
> @@ -1410,6 +1411,7 @@ static void intel_engine_print_registers(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
> if (tl)
> intel_timeline_put(tl);
> }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> execlists_active_unlock_bh(execlists);
> } else if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) > 6) {
> drm_printf(m, "\tPP_DIR_BASE: 0x%08x\n",
> --
> 2.24.0
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
