On 2024/11/12 22:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 10:46:27PM +0800, Zijun Hu wrote:
>> On 2024/11/12 19:43, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 08:20:22AM +0800, Zijun Hu wrote:
>>>> From: Zijun Hu <quic_zijuhu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> class_dev_iter_init(struct class_dev_iter *iter, struct class *class, ...)
>>>> has return type void, but it does not initialize its output parameter @iter
>>>> when suffers class_to_subsys(@class) error, so caller can not detect the
>>>> error and call API class_dev_iter_next(@iter) which will dereference wild
>>>> pointers of @iter's members as shown by below typical usage:
>>>>
>>>> // @iter's members are wild pointers
>>>> struct class_dev_iter iter;
>>>>
>>>> // No change in @iter when the error happens.
>>>> class_dev_iter_init(&iter, ...);
>>>>
>>>> // dereference these wild member pointers here.
>>>> while (dev = class_dev_iter_next(&iter)) { ... }.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, all callers of the API have such usage pattern in kernel tree.
>>>> Fix by memset() @iter in API *_init() and error checking @iter in *_next().
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 7b884b7f24b4 ("driver core: class.c: convert to only use class_to_subsys")
>>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> There is no in-kernel broken users of this from what I can tell, right?
>>> Otherwise things would have blown up by now, so why is this needed in
>>> stable kernels?
>>>
>>
>> For all callers of the API in current kernel tree, the class should have
>> been registered successfully when the API is invoking.
>
> Great, so the existing code is just fine :)
>
>> so, could you remove both Fix and stable tag directly?
>
> Nope, sorry. Asking a maintainer that gets hundreds of patches to
> hand-edit them does not scale.
>
> But really, as all in-kernel users are just fine, why add additional
> code if it's not needed? THat's just going to increase our maintance
> burden for the next 40+ years for no good reason.
>
Hi Greg.
This fix is very worthy and necessary since it fixes the APIs self issue
and the issue is irrelevant with how various API users (in-tree or
out-of-tree) use it as below inference shown:
API class_dev_iter_init() has checks for class_to_subsys(class) error
-> the error may happen
-> once the error happens
-> wild pointers dereference must happen within API class_dev_iter_next()
-> how terrible for such issue, and the error handling also have no
prompt messages.
API users must not like silent wild pointer dereference once the error
happen.
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
