Re: [BUG] usb: dwc3: Kernel NULL pointer dereference in dwc3_remove()

[Sandeep Maheswaram]

On 6/10/2021 9:03 PM, Jack Pham wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:11:42PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Jack Pham <jackp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:20:12AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > > Jack Pham <jackp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > > I've been able to bisect the panic and the offending commit is 568262bf5492 ("usb:
> > > > > > > > > > > dwc3: core: Add shutdown callback for dwc3"). I can provide more diagnostic
> > > > > > > > > > > information if needed and I can help test the fix.
> > > > > > > > > > if you simply revert that commit in HEAD, does the problem really go
> > > > > > > > > > away?
> > > > > > > > > Kernel built from commit 324c92e5e0ee, which is the kernel tip today, the panic is
> > > > > > > > > there. Reverting the offending commit, 568262bf5492, makes the panic disappear.
> > > > > > > > Want to send a revert so I can take it now?
> > > > > > > I can send a revert, but Felipe was asking Sandeep (the commit author) for a fix,
> > > > > > > so I'll leave it up to Felipe to decide how to proceed.
> > > > > > I'm okay with a revert. Feel free to add my Acked-by: Felipe Balbi
> > > > > > <balbi@xxxxxxxxxx> or it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sandeep, please send a new version that doesn't encounter the same
> > > > > > issue. Make sure to test by reloading the driver in a tight loop for
> > > > > > several iterations.
> > > > > This would probably be tricky to test on other "glue" drivers as the
> > > > > problem appears to be specific only to dwc3_of_simple.  It looks like
> > > > > both dwc3_of_simple and the dwc3 core now (due to 568262bf5492) each
> > > > > implement respective .shutdown callbacks. The latter is simply a wrapper
> > > > > around dwc3_remove(). And from the panic call stack above we see that
> > > > > dwc3_of_simple_shutdown() calls of_platform_depopulate() which will
> > > > > again call dwc3_remove() resulting in the double remove.
> > > > >
> > > > > So would an alternative approach be to protect against dwc3_remove()
> > > > > getting called multiple times? IMO it'd be a bit messy to have to add
> > > > no, I  don't think so. That sounds like a workaround. We should be able
> > > > to guarantee that ->remove() doesn't get called twice using the driver
> > > > model properly.
> > > Completely fair.  So then having a .shutdown callback that directly calls
> > > dwc3_remove() is probably not the right thing to do as it completely
> > > bypasses the driver model so if and when the driver core does later
> > > release the device from the driver that's how we end up with the double
> > > remove.
> > yeah, I would agree with that.
> >
> > > > > additional checks there to know if it had already been called. So maybe
> > > > > avoid it altogether--should dwc3_of_simple_shutdown() just skip calling
> > > > > of_platform_depopulate()?
> > > > I don't know what the idiomatic is nowadays, but at least early on, we
> > > > had to call depopulate.
> > > So any suggestions on how to fix the original issue Sandeep was trying
> > > to fix with 568262bf5492? Maybe implement .shutdown in dwc3_qcom and have
> > > it follow what dwc3_of_simple does with of_platform_depopulate()? But
> > > then wouldn't other "glues" want/need to follow suit?
> > I think we can implement shutdown in core, but we need to careful with
> > it. Instead of just blindly calling remove, let's extract the common
> > parts to another internal function that both remove and shutdown
> > call. debugfs removal should not be part of that generic method :-)
> Hi Sandeep,
>
> Upon re-reading your description in 568262bf5492 it sounds like the
> original intention of your patch is basically to quiesce the HW so that
> it doesn't continue to run after SMMU/IOMMU is disabled right?
>
> If that is the case, couldn't we simply call only dwc3_core_exit_mode()
> assuming there is no other requirement to do any other cleanup/teardown
> (PHYs, clocks, resets, runtime PM, et al)? This function should do the
> bare minimum of stopping the controller in whatever mode (host or
> peripheral) it is currently operating in.

Yes that was the intention. I will call only dwc3_core_exit_mode()

and check. Is there any way we can do from dwc3 qcom glue driver to

avoid problems for other glue drivers?


> > Anything in that generic method should, probably, be idempotent.
> Yes we'll need to ensure that dwc3_core_exit_mode() can be called
> multiple times without additional side effects. At first glance this
> probably means setting dwc->xhci and dwc->gadget to NULL from
> dwc3_host_exit() and dwc3_gadget_exit(), respectively.

Ok. Is there any way to test this ?


> Thanks,
> Jack