On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:03 AM Stanimir Varbanov
<stanimir.varbanov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thanks for the patch!
>
> On 3/6/20 2:23 AM, Jeffrey Kardatzke wrote:
> > In dynamic bufmode we do not manage the buffers in the registeredbufs
> > list, so do not add them there when they are initialized. Adding them
> > there was causing a use after free of the list_head struct in the buffer
> > when new buffers were allocated after existing buffers were freed.
>
> Is this fixing a real issue? How you come to it?
>
In our code we were allocating 64x64 capture queue buffers initially,
then got a resolution change event for the actual video resolution of
320x256 so we freed all the existing capture buffers and allocated new
ones. I had noticed memory poisoning warnings in dmesg and tracked it
down to the patch I created here. This is only a problem when the
capture queue has its buffers freed and reallocated (which would
happen during any resolution change).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Kardatzke <jkardatzke@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c
> > index bcc603804041..688a3593b49b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c
> > @@ -1054,8 +1054,10 @@ int venus_helper_vb2_buf_init(struct vb2_buffer *vb)
> > buf->size = vb2_plane_size(vb, 0);
> > buf->dma_addr = sg_dma_address(sgt->sgl);
> >
> > - if (vb->type == V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VIDEO_CAPTURE_MPLANE)
> > + if (vb->type == V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VIDEO_CAPTURE_MPLANE &&
> > + !is_dynamic_bufmode(inst)) {
>
> If you add !is_dynamic_bufmode here, we will loose the reference frames
> mechanism (see venus_helper_release_buf_ref()) which is not good.
In my testing, I never see venus_helper_release_buf_ref called. I
think something is wrong with reference frame management. I'm also
seeing failure in my tests that very much look like reference frames
that were dropped in the decoder (with or without my patch); but they
are not consistent.
>
> Thus, I wonder (depending on when you observe the use-after-free issue)
> does this is the correct resolution of the problem.
I agree this is likely not the right solution to the problem, there's
something deeper that's wrong I think because I never see events
coming back from hfi with the release buffer reference event.
>
> > list_add_tail(&buf->reg_list, &inst->registeredbufs);
> > + }
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
>
> --
> regards,
> Stan
