Re: [PATCH] intel_th: core: fix null pointer dereference in intel_th_irq
From: alex
Date: Fri Sep 26 2025 - 12:27:46 EST
On 2025-08-25 20:45, David Arcari wrote:
In certain cases intel_th_irq can reference a null entry in
the th->thdev array. This results in the splat shown below.
The problem is that intel_th_output_enable() can modify the
thdev[] array at the same time intel_th_irq is referencing
the same array. This can be fixed by disabling interrupts
during the call to intel_th_output_enable().
Hi David,
Thank you for the bug report and rootcausing! Can you please also
detail the sequence of actions by which this is reproduced, so
that I can test my fix and not bother you with a back-and-forth
over-email debugging and also add it to our regression testing?
Doesn't have to be a shell script (although I wouldn't say no
to that), plain english would work in a pinch. If you have the
time, I'm also curious about your use case for intel_th.
This has eluded our testing for about 10 years, so I'm very
interested in the reproducer.
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000304
Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI
RIP: 0010:intel_th_irq+0x26/0x70 [intel_th]
Yes, this is absolutely a bug.
@@ -715,7 +715,9 @@ intel_th_subdevice_alloc(struct intel_th *th,
int intel_th_output_enable(struct intel_th *th, unsigned int otype)
{
struct intel_th_device *thdev;
- int src = 0, dst = 0;
+ int src = 0, dst = 0, ret = 0;
+
+ disable_irq(th->irq);
for (src = 0, dst = 0; dst <= th->num_thdevs; src++, dst++) {
for (; src < ARRAY_SIZE(intel_th_subdevices); src++) {
[...]
@@ -750,16 +752,19 @@ int intel_th_output_enable(struct intel_th *th, unsigned int otype)
goto found;
}
+nodev:
+ enable_irq(th->irq);
return -ENODEV;
found:
thdev = intel_th_subdevice_alloc(th, &intel_th_subdevices[src]);
if (IS_ERR(thdev))
- return PTR_ERR(thdev);
-
- th->thdev[th->num_thdevs++] = thdev;
+ ret = PTR_ERR(thdev);
+ else
+ th->thdev[th->num_thdevs++] = thdev;
- return 0;
+ enable_irq(th->irq);
+ return ret;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_th_output_enable);
This is indeed a possible fix, but I believe a little bit of
serialization can be employed here.
Lastly, my apologies for tardiness.
Thanks!
--
Alex