openrisc: fix arbitrary kernel memory access via or1k_atomic syscallgrafted

sys_or1k_atomic() (syscall 244 in the "or1k" ABI) takes two user
pointers, v1 and v2, and swaps the words they point to in hand-written
assembly.

    l.lwz   r29,0(r4)
    l.lwz   r27,0(r5)
    l.sw    0(r4),r27
    l.sw    0(r5),r29

The pointers are not checked with access_ok(). The four memory
accesses also have no exception table entries.

A caller passes a kernel address as either pointer, and the syscall
reads from and writes to it directly.

This gives an unprivileged process a kernel read/write primitive. It
overwrites kernel data such as the sys_call_table, gaining code
execution in kernel context.

Check both pointers before entering the critical section. Add fixups
for the four memory accesses so faults on valid but unmapped user
addresses return -EFAULT.

[shorne@gmail.com: fix comment style]
Fixes: 9d02a4283e9c ("OpenRISC: Boot code")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ali Ahmet Memis <ali@iusegentoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>

1 files changed, 129 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/mailbox.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/mailbox.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..d46c60bd5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/driver-api/mailbox.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
+============================
+The Common Mailbox Framework
+============================
+
+:Author: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
+
+This document aims to help developers write client and controller
+drivers for the API. But before we start, let us note that the
+client (especially) and controller drivers are likely going to be
+very platform specific because the remote firmware is likely to be
+proprietary and implement non-standard protocol. So even if two
+platforms employ, say, PL320 controller, the client drivers can't
+be shared across them. Even the PL320 driver might need to accommodate
+some platform specific quirks. So the API is meant mainly to avoid
+similar copies of code written for each platform. Having said that,
+nothing prevents the remote f/w to also be Linux based and use the
+same api there. However none of that helps us locally because we only
+ever deal at client's protocol level.
+
+Some of the choices made during implementation are the result of this
+peculiarity of this "common" framework.
+
+
+
+Controller Driver (See include/linux/mailbox_controller.h)
+==========================================================
+
+
+Allocate mbox_controller and the array of mbox_chan.
+Populate mbox_chan_ops, except flush() and peek_data() all are mandatory.
+The controller driver might know a message has been consumed
+by the remote by getting an IRQ or polling some hardware flag
+or it can never know (the client knows by way of the protocol).
+The method in order of preference is IRQ -> Poll -> None, which
+the controller driver should set via 'txdone_irq' or 'txdone_poll'
+or neither.
+
+
+Client Driver (See include/linux/mailbox_client.h)
+==================================================
+
+
+The client might want to operate in blocking mode (synchronously
+send a message through before returning) or non-blocking/async mode (submit
+a message and a callback function to the API and return immediately).
+
+::
+
+	struct demo_client {
+		struct mbox_client cl;
+		struct mbox_chan *mbox;
+		struct completion c;
+		bool async;
+		/* ... */
+	};
+
+	/*
+	* This is the handler for data received from remote. The behaviour is purely
+	* dependent upon the protocol. This is just an example.
+	*/
+	static void message_from_remote(struct mbox_client *cl, void *mssg)
+	{
+		struct demo_client *dc = container_of(cl, struct demo_client, cl);
+		if (dc->async) {
+			if (is_an_ack(mssg)) {
+				/* An ACK to our last sample sent */
+				return; /* Or do something else here */
+			} else { /* A new message from remote */
+				queue_req(mssg);
+			}
+		} else {
+			/* Remote f/w sends only ACK packets on this channel */
+			return;
+		}
+	}
+
+	static void sample_sent(struct mbox_client *cl, void *mssg, int r)
+	{
+		struct demo_client *dc = container_of(cl, struct demo_client, cl);
+		complete(&dc->c);
+	}
+
+	static void client_demo(struct platform_device *pdev)
+	{
+		struct demo_client *dc_sync, *dc_async;
+		/* The controller already knows async_pkt and sync_pkt */
+		struct async_pkt ap;
+		struct sync_pkt sp;
+
+		dc_sync = kzalloc_obj(*dc_sync);
+		dc_async = kzalloc_obj(*dc_async);
+
+		/* Populate non-blocking mode client */
+		dc_async->cl.dev = &pdev->dev;
+		dc_async->cl.rx_callback = message_from_remote;
+		dc_async->cl.tx_done = sample_sent;
+		dc_async->cl.tx_block = false;
+		dc_async->cl.tx_tout = 0; /* doesn't matter here */
+		dc_async->cl.knows_txdone = false; /* depending upon protocol */
+		dc_async->async = true;
+		init_completion(&dc_async->c);
+
+		/* Populate blocking mode client */
+		dc_sync->cl.dev = &pdev->dev;
+		dc_sync->cl.rx_callback = message_from_remote;
+		dc_sync->cl.tx_done = NULL; /* operate in blocking mode */
+		dc_sync->cl.tx_block = true;
+		dc_sync->cl.tx_tout = 500; /* by half a second */
+		dc_sync->cl.knows_txdone = false; /* depending upon protocol */
+		dc_sync->async = false;
+
+		/* ASync mailbox is listed second in 'mboxes' property */
+		dc_async->mbox = mbox_request_channel(&dc_async->cl, 1);
+		/* Populate data packet */
+		/* ap.xxx = 123; etc */
+		/* Send async message to remote */
+		mbox_send_message(dc_async->mbox, &ap);
+
+		/* Sync mailbox is listed first in 'mboxes' property */
+		dc_sync->mbox = mbox_request_channel(&dc_sync->cl, 0);
+		/* Populate data packet */
+		/* sp.abc = 123; etc */
+		/* Send message to remote in blocking mode */
+		mbox_send_message(dc_sync->mbox, &sp);
+		/* At this point 'sp' has been sent */
+
+		/* Now wait for async chan to be done */
+		wait_for_completion(&dc_async->c);
+	}