Hi Bean
The issue 100 % reproducible on the platform where the UFS device is secondary device.
Device is UFS 4.0 configured to support RPMB.
I am using ufs-utils tool with your committed arpmb code. For example. run get write arpmb counter command:
./ufs-utils arpmb -t 1 -p /dev/ufs-bsg.
After the change, the crash doesn't occur. See the full kernel crash before the fix:
Let me know if you need more details
3,1290,531166405,-;ufshcd 0000:00:12.5: ARPMB OP failed: error code -22
SUBSYSTEM=pci
DEVICE=+pci:0000:00:12.5
0,1291,531166433,-;usercopy: Kernel memory exposure attempt detected from SLUB object 'kmalloc-96' (offset 0, size 104)!
4,1292,531166452,-;------------[ cut here ]------------
2,1293,531166455,-;kernel BUG at mm/usercopy.c:102!
4,1294,531166467,-;invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI
4,1295,531166475,-;CPU: 4 PID: 3321 Comm: ufs-utils-micro Not tainted 6.4.0-060400-generic #202306271339
4,1296,531166483,-;Hardware name: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. 767XCL/NT767XCL-KLTES, BIOS P07AJD.053.200820.KS 08/20/2020
4,1297,531166487,-;RIP: 0010:usercopy_abort+0x6c/0x80
4,1298,531166504,-;Code: 75 86 51 48 c7 c2 4f a3 7a 86 41 52 48 c7 c7 38 1f 77 86 48 0f 45 d6 48 c7 c6 fb 2c 75 86 48 89 c1 49 0f 45 f3 e8 c4 9e d0 ff <0f> 0b 49 c7 c1 b8 e1 74 86 4d 89 ca 4d 89 c8 eb a8 0f 1f 00 90 90
4,1299,531166511,-;RSP: 0018:ffffb1d2c217bc10 EFLAGS: 00010246
4,1300,531166520,-;RAX: 0000000000000065 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000000
4,1301,531166524,-;RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000
4,1302,531166528,-;RBP: ffffb1d2c217bc28 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
4,1303,531166531,-;R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000068
4,1304,531166535,-;R13: ffff911d40042600 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: 00007ffe9126ede0
4,1305,531166539,-;FS: 000000000071b3c0(0000) GS:ffff911ea7600000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
4,1306,531166545,-;CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
4,1307,531166550,-;CR2: 00007ffe9126eff8 CR3: 00000001856e0000 CR4: 0000000000350ee0
4,1308,531166555,-;Call Trace:
4,1309,531166559,-; <TASK>
4,1310,531166565,-; ? show_regs+0x6d/0x80
4,1311,531166575,-; ? die+0x37/0xa0
4,1312,531166583,-; ? do_trap+0xd4/0xf0
4,1313,531166593,-; ? do_error_trap+0x71/0xb0
4,1314,531166601,-; ? usercopy_abort+0x6c/0x80
4,1315,531166610,-; ? exc_invalid_op+0x52/0x80
4,1316,531166622,-; ? usercopy_abort+0x6c/0x80
4,1317,531166630,-; ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1b/0x20
4,1318,531166643,-; ? usercopy_abort+0x6c/0x80
4,1319,531166652,-; __check_heap_object+0xe3/0x120
4,1320,531166661,-; check_heap_object+0x185/0x1d0
4,1321,531166670,-; __check_object_size.part.0+0x72/0x150
4,1322,531166679,-; __check_object_size+0x23/0x30
4,1323,531166688,-; bsg_transport_sg_io_fn+0x314/0x3b0
4,1324,531166699,-; ? __pfx_bsg_transport_sg_io_fn+0x10/0x10
4,1325,531166707,-; bsg_sg_io+0x9e/0x120
4,1326,531166717,-; bsg_ioctl+0x1f4/0x240
4,1327,531166723,-; __x64_sys_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0
4,1328,531166734,-; do_syscall_64+0x58/0x90
4,1329,531166743,-; ? putname+0x5d/0x80
4,1330,531166752,-; ? do_sys_openat2+0xab/0x180
4,1331,531166761,-; ? exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x30/0xb0
4,1332,531166771,-; ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x29/0x50
4,1333,531166781,-; ? do_syscall_64+0x67/0x90
4,1334,531166788,-; ? irqentry_exit_to_user_mode+0x9/0x20
4,1335,531166798,-; ? irqentry_exit+0x43/0x50
4,1336,531166806,-; ? exc_page_fault+0x94/0x1b0
4,1337,531166815,-; entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc
4,1338,531166824,-;RIP: 0033:0x45759f
4,1339,531166871,-;Code: 00 48 89 44 24 18 31 c0 48 8d 44 24 60 c7 04 24 10 00 00 00 48 89 44 24 08 48 8d 44 24 20 48 89 44 24 10 b8 10 00 00 00 0f 05 <41> 89 c0 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 1f 48 8b 44 24 18 64 48 2b 04 25 28 00
4,1340,531166877,-;RSP: 002b:00007ffe9126eba0 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
-----Original Message-----
From: Bean Huo <huobean@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 2:31 PM
To: Arthur Simchaev <Arthur.Simchaev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Avi Shchislowski <Avi.Shchislowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>; beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; bvanassche@xxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ufs: core: bsg: Fix memory crash in case arpmb command failed
On Tue, 2025-02-18 at 13:15 +0200, Arthur Simchaev wrote:
> In case the device doesn't support arpmb, the kernel get memory crash
> due to copy user data in bsg_transport_sg_io_fn level. So in case
> ufs_bsg_exec_advanced_rpmb_req returned error, do not set the job's
> reply_len.
>
> Memory crash backtrace:
> 3,1290,531166405,-;ufshcd 0000:00:12.5: ARPMB OP failed: error code -
> 22
>
> 4,1308,531166555,-;Call Trace:
>
> 4,1309,531166559,-; <TASK>
>
> 4,1310,531166565,-; ? show_regs+0x6d/0x80
>
> 4,1311,531166575,-; ? die+0x37/0xa0
>
> 4,1312,531166583,-; ? do_trap+0xd4/0xf0
>
> 4,1313,531166593,-; ? do_error_trap+0x71/0xb0
>
> 4,1314,531166601,-; ? usercopy_abort+0x6c/0x80
>
> 4,1315,531166610,-; ? exc_invalid_op+0x52/0x80
>
> 4,1316,531166622,-; ? usercopy_abort+0x6c/0x80
>
> 4,1317,531166630,-; ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1b/0x20
>
> 4,1318,531166643,-; ? usercopy_abort+0x6c/0x80
>
> 4,1319,531166652,-; __check_heap_object+0xe3/0x120
>
> 4,1320,531166661,-; check_heap_object+0x185/0x1d0
>
> 4,1321,531166670,-; __check_object_size.part.0+0x72/0x150
>
> 4,1322,531166679,-; __check_object_size+0x23/0x30
>
> 4,1323,531166688,-; bsg_transport_sg_io_fn+0x314/0x3b0
>
> Fixes: 6ff265fc5ef6 ("scsi: ufs: core: bsg: Add advanced RPMB support
> in ufs_bsg")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Arthur Simchaev <arthur.simchaev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Add Fixes tag
> - Elaborate commit log
>
> Signed-off-by: Arthur Simchaev <arthur.simchaev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c
> index 8d4ad0a3f2cf..a8ed9bc6e4f1 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c
> @@ -194,10 +194,12 @@ static int ufs_bsg_request(struct bsg_job *job)
> ufshcd_rpm_put_sync(hba);
> kfree(buff);
> bsg_reply->result = ret;
> - job->reply_len = !rpmb ? sizeof(struct ufs_bsg_reply) :
> sizeof(struct ufs_rpmb_reply);
> /* complete the job here only if no error */
> - if (ret == 0)
> + if (ret == 0) {
> + job->reply_len = !rpmb ? sizeof(struct ufs_bsg_reply)
> :
> + sizeof(struct
> ufs_rpmb_reply);
> bsg_job_done(job, ret, bsg_reply-
> >reply_payload_rcv_len);
> + }
>
> return ret;
> }
Arthur,
thanks for your update.
I tried to repoduce the issue as your steps, I didn't get this issue, The kernel will only print this as expected:
Err: ARPMB OP failed 0 :-22
I don't think your patch can fix your issue, becase if ufs_bsg returns
-EINVAL(-22). then,
bsg_reply->result = ret(-22);
after that, then in bsg_transport_sg_io_fn:
if (job->result < 0) {
job->reply_len = sizeof(u32); //overwrite the length.
Could you please provide more information how you can get this issue?
My understanding is that it is not because this job->reply_len, it is your buffer initiated by your application?
Kind regards,
Bean
