On 2021/8/21 2:44, Bob Pearson wrote:
> On 8/20/21 6:15 AM, Xiao Yang wrote:
>> 1) New index member of struct rxe_queue is introduced but not zeroed
>> so the initial value of index may be random.
>> 2) Current index is not masked off to index_mask.
>> In such case, producer_addr() and consumer_addr() will get an invalid
>> address by the random index and then accessing the invalid address
>> triggers the following panic:
>> "BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffff9ae2c07a1414"
>>
>> Fix the issue by using kzalloc() to zero out index member.
>>
>> Fixes: 5bcf5a59c41e ("RDMA/rxe: Protext kernel index from user space")
>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Yang<yangx.jy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_queue.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_queue.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_queue.c
>> index 85b812586ed4..72d95398e604 100644
>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_queue.c
>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_queue.c
>> @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ struct rxe_queue *rxe_queue_init(struct rxe_dev *rxe, int *num_elem,
>> if (*num_elem< 0)
>> goto err1;
>>
>> - q = kmalloc(sizeof(*q), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + q = kzalloc(sizeof(*q), GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (!q)
>> goto err1;
>>
>>
> Thanks for this!! I am happy to take the blame but this has been there from the original 2016 rxe commit. Its a good catch.
Hi Bob,
The original 2016 rxe commit actually introduced kmalloc() but it
initialized all members of struct rxe_queue at subsequent steps.
When the new index member of struct rxe_queue was added, it didn't
initialized at subsequent steps. So I think the issue was caused by
your patch.
I use kzalloc() to fix the issue because I want to avoid the same issue
when another new member will be added in future.
Best Regards,
Xiao Yang
> Reviewed-by: Bob Pearson<rpearsonhpe@xxxxxxxxx>
