Re: [PATCH v1 3/4] iommu: Unpublish the old attach handle before the group replace callback
From: Yi Liu
Date: Fri Oct 30 2026 - 04:14:08 EST
On 10/30/26 02:45, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 07:00:18PM +0800, Yi Liu wrote:
On 10/29/26 15:25, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2026 5:52 AM
iommu_replace_group_handle() looks like it hides the detaching handle ahead
of the driver callback. But in fact, xa_reserve() calls xa_cmpxchg(), which
stores only when the current entry matches @old=NULL. For a replace, there
must be an entry sitting there by definition (i.e. @old cannot be NULL), so
the compare fails, XA_ZERO_ENTRY is never written, and the call decays into
a plain read.
Therefore, the old handle stays published during
__iommu_group_set_domain()
and only gets replaced after the call. This creates a window, during which
an asynchronous fault path might hit UAF:
core, holding group->mutex fault path, no group->mutex
========================== ===========================
xa_reserve() ,-- old handle stays published
no-op, the slot is occupied |
__iommu_group_set_domain() |
driver attach/detach ops |
iopf_queue_flush_dev() |
| iommu_attach_handle_get()
| reads old_handle
xa_store(new entry) `-- window closes
mutex_unlock()
kfree(old_handle) [caller]
UAF: old_handle->domain->iopf_handler()
Replace the xa_reserve() with xa_store(XA_ZERO_ENTRY) to unpublish the old
handle.
Fixes: 8519e689834a ("iommu: Extend domain attach group with handle
support")
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
btw I just realized that neither old code nor this fix can actually support
replacement with lossless fault handling, but I don't recall whether it
was the original goal (then destroyed by a following change) or intended
to be a future enhancement...
There was a related discussion[1]. With this patch, a page request in
the replace window gets IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_INVALID instead of being
serviced - spec only says re-issuing the same PRG won't succeed unless
the mapping changes, it doesn't forbid retry. So I think this is just a
more conservative instance of the failure case Jason already called OK
in [1], not a new hazard.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20241105151042.GC458827@xxxxxxxxxx/
I called using either the old or new translation OK, using neither
seems suboptimal. So returning IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_INVALID doesn't sound
ideal..
I see. maybe we can have a interim state for the replace window. This
state responds PageRequests with success for the device. The device
shall retry DMA and re-trigger PageRequests again. Once the replacement
is done, PageRequests should be forwarded to the correct domain and get
resolved.
Regards,
Yi Liu