diff options
| author | Shivank Garg <shivankg@amd.com> | 2026-08-22 19:22:05 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> | 2026-09-09 17:51:44 +0530 |
| commit | e873c74132f0c5f1452816cd9bb26208f0bba1e1 (patch) | |
| tree | cc1ce1567f5b982359331863ebd9da38741f8d2e /Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst | |
| download | linux-stable-e873c74132f0c5f1452816cd9bb26208f0bba1e1.tar.gz linux-stable-e873c74132f0c5f1452816cd9bb26208f0bba1e1.zip | |
dmaengine: fix use-after-free in dma_chan_put() and dma_release_channel()grafted
When dma_device_put() drops the last reference on chan->device->ref,
dma_device_release() runs and may free the dma_device along with its
channels.
dma_chan_put() then still reads chan->device->owner via
dma_chan_to_owner() for the trailing module_put(). KASAN catches it:
slab-use-after-free in dma_chan_put+0x3e6/0x4c0
Read of size 8 by task insmod/6319
Freed by task 6319:
kfree+0x225/0x470
dma_chan_put+0x395/0x4c0
dmaengine_put+0xf8/0x160
Cache the module owner in dma_chan_put() before the put so the trailing
module_put() does not need chan->device.
Fixes: 8ad342a86359 ("dmaengine: Add reference counting to dma_device struct")
Suggested-by: Sashiko <sashiko-bot@kernel.org>
Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260518-dmaengine-kref-fix-v1-1-4d6125048fb7@amd.com
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Signed-off-by: Shivank Garg <shivankg@amd.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260822-dmaengine-kref-fix-v5-3-d4a4ee47d927@amd.com
Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst | 69 |
1 files changed, 69 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst b/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000..13ab13984 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) + +========== +Guidelines +========== + +This document describes the general project guidelines that apply to nova-core +and nova-drm. + +Language +======== + +The Nova project uses the Rust programming language. In this context, all rules +of the Rust for Linux project as documented in +:doc:`../../rust/general-information` apply. Additionally, the following rules +apply. + +- Unless technically necessary otherwise (e.g. uAPI), any driver code is written + in Rust. + +- Unless technically necessary, unsafe Rust code must be avoided. In case of + technical necessity, unsafe code should be isolated in a separate component + providing a safe API for other driver code to use. + +Style +----- + +All rules of the Rust for Linux project as documented in +:doc:`../../rust/coding-guidelines` apply. + +For a submit checklist, please also see the `Rust for Linux Submit checklist +addendum <https://rust-for-linux.com/contributing#submit-checklist-addendum>`_. + +Documentation +============= + +The availability of proper documentation is essential in terms of scalability, +accessibility for new contributors and maintainability of a project in general, +but especially for a driver running as complex hardware as Nova is targeting. + +Hence, adding documentation of any kind is very much encouraged by the project. + +Besides that, there are some minimum requirements. + +- Every non-private structure needs at least a brief doc comment explaining the + semantical sense of the structure, as well as potential locking and lifetime + requirements. It is encouraged to have the same minimum documentation for + non-trivial private structures. + +- uAPIs must be fully documented with kernel-doc comments; additionally, the + semantical behavior must be explained including potential special or corner + cases. + +- The APIs connecting the 1st level driver (nova-core) with 2nd level drivers + must be fully documented. This includes doc comments, potential locking and + lifetime requirements, as well as example code if applicable. + +- Abbreviations must be explained when introduced; terminology must be uniquely + defined. + +- Register addresses, layouts, shift values and masks must be defined properly; + unless obvious, the semantical sense must be documented. This only applies if + the author is able to obtain the corresponding information. + +Acceptance Criteria +=================== + +- Patches must only be applied if reviewed by at least one other person on the + mailing list; this also applies for maintainers. |
