Thanks for the reply! I will follow the rules and revise the patch. Best wishes, Jia-Ju Bai On 2023/9/25 20:08, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 06:07:41PM +0800, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:In _dwc2_hcd_urb_enqueue(), "urb->hcpriv = NULL" is executed without holding the lock "hsotg->lock". In _dwc2_hcd_urb_dequeue(): spin_lock_irqsave(&hsotg->lock, flags); ... if (!urb->hcpriv) { dev_dbg(hsotg->dev, "## urb->hcpriv is NULL ##\n"); goto out; } rc = dwc2_hcd_urb_dequeue(hsotg, urb->hcpriv); // Use urb->hcpriv ... out: spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hsotg->lock, flags); When _dwc2_hcd_urb_enqueue() and _dwc2_hcd_urb_dequeue() are concurrently executed, the NULL check of "urb->hcpriv" can be executed before "urb->hcpriv = NULL". After urb->hcpriv is NULL, it can be used in the function call to dwc2_hcd_urb_dequeue(), which can cause a NULL pointer dereference. This possible bug is found by a static tool developed by myself.Because of this please follow the rules for such things as documented in Documentation/process/researcher-guidelines.rstTo fix this possible bug, "urb->hcpriv = NULL" should be executed with holding the lock "hsotg->lock". Because I have no associated hardware, I cannot test the patch in real execution, and just verify it according to the code logic. Fixes: 33ad261aa62b ("usb: dwc2: host: spinlock urb_enqueue") Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju@xxxxxxxxxxx>My bot says: ----------- Hi, This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux kernel tree. You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s) as indicated below: - You have marked a patch with a "Fixes:" tag for a commit that is in an older released kernel, yet you do not have a cc: stable line in the signed-off-by area at all, which means that the patch will not be applied to any older kernel releases. To properly fix this, please follow the documented rules in the Documetnation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file for how to resolve this. If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received from other developers. thanks, greg k-h's patch email bot
