From e873c74132f0c5f1452816cd9bb26208f0bba1e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shivank Garg Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2026 19:22:05 +0000 Subject: dmaengine: fix use-after-free in dma_chan_put() and dma_release_channel() 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 Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260518-dmaengine-kref-fix-v1-1-4d6125048fb7@amd.com Reviewed-by: Frank Li Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe Signed-off-by: Shivank Garg Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260822-dmaengine-kref-fix-v5-3-d4a4ee47d927@amd.com Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul --- rust/helpers/build_assert.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) create mode 100644 rust/helpers/build_assert.c (limited to 'rust/helpers/build_assert.c') diff --git a/rust/helpers/build_assert.c b/rust/helpers/build_assert.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6a54b2680 --- /dev/null +++ b/rust/helpers/build_assert.c @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +#include + +/* + * `bindgen` binds the C `size_t` type as the Rust `usize` type, so we can + * use it in contexts where Rust expects a `usize` like slice (array) indices. + * `usize` is defined to be the same as C's `uintptr_t` type (can hold any + * pointer) but not necessarily the same as `size_t` (can hold the size of any + * single object). Most modern platforms use the same concrete integer type for + * both of them, but in case we find ourselves on a platform where + * that's not true, fail early instead of risking ABI or + * integer-overflow issues. + * + * If your platform fails this assertion, it means that you are in + * danger of integer-overflow bugs (even if you attempt to add + * `--no-size_t-is-usize`). It may be easiest to change the kernel ABI on + * your platform such that `size_t` matches `uintptr_t` (i.e., to increase + * `size_t`, because `uintptr_t` has to be at least as big as `size_t`). + */ +static_assert( + sizeof(size_t) == sizeof(uintptr_t) && + __alignof__(size_t) == __alignof__(uintptr_t), + "Rust code expects C `size_t` to match Rust `usize`" +); -- cgit v1.3.1