From: zjamg <ndaugoing@gmail.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>
Cc: Fuad Tabba <fuad.tabba@linux.dev>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Steffen Eiden <seiden@linux.ibm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Yuchao Zhang <ndaugoing@gmail.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] KVM: arm64: vgic: Do not remove in-flight LPIs from AP list on disable
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 10:46:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260918024620.83869-2-ndaugoing@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260918024620.83869-1-ndaugoing@gmail.com>
From: Yuchao Zhang <ndaugoing@gmail.com>
By code inspection, a race condition and potential Use-After-Free/crash
exists between remote LPI disabling and local LR folding when EOImode==0.
Commit 6da5e537f5af ("KVM: arm64: vgic: Pick EOIcount deactivations from
AP-list tail") introduced tracking the last interrupt placed in a List
Register in per-CPU host data (*host_data_ptr(last_lr_irq)) and traverses
the remaining ap_list via list_for_each_entry_continue() in
vgic_v3_fold_lr_state().
However, an interrupt loaded into an LR can be an LPI. While vCPU-B is
running the guest, another vCPU-A can write to vCPU-B's redistributor
GICR_CTLR to clear EnableLPIs, which dispatches vgic_flush_pending_lpis().
vgic_flush_pending_lpis() unconditionally removes all LPIs from ap_list
without checking whether the interrupt is currently in an LR
(irq->on_lr):
- It calls list_del(&irq->ap_list), setting ap_list.next to LIST_POISON1,
and drops the AP-list reference.
- If the LPI is unmapped or its translation cache was invalidated, the
vgic_irq refcount drops to zero and the object is freed via RCU.
- Meanwhile, vCPU-B's per-CPU *host_data_ptr(last_lr_irq) cannot be
cleared by remote vCPUs and is left dangling.
When vCPU-B subsequently exits the guest:
1. vgic_v3_fold_lr_state() resumes using the unlinked last_lr_irq.
2. list_for_each_entry_continue() unconditionally evaluates
list_next_entry(irq, ap_list) during loop initialization, accessing
LIST_POISON1 (or freed memory).
3. If eoicount > 0, it attempts guard(raw_spinlock)(&irq->irq_lock) on
the poisoned address, leading to an immediate host kernel panic.
Fix this by:
1. In vgic_flush_pending_lpis(), do not remove LPIs that are currently
in-flight in an LR (irq->on_lr == true). They will be naturally pruned
by the owning vCPU's vgic_prune_ap_list() after LR folding.
2. In vgic_fold_state(), clear *host_data_ptr(last_lr_irq) after folding
so that no stale pointer survives past guest execution.
3. In vgic_v3_fold_lr_state() and vgic_v2_fold_lr_state(), bail out
immediately if eoicount is zero, avoiding unnecessary list_next_entry()
evaluation.
Note: this closes the primary race (the last_lr_irq node itself is no
longer unlinkable while in-flight), but the fold traversal can still
race with a remote flush unlinking a subsequent non-LR node in the
ap_list tail. Fully closing that window needs the fold side to take
references before dropping locks (in the spirit of the prune-side fix
in commit 7258770e5814 ("KVM: arm64: vgic: Handle race between
interrupt affinity change and LPI disabling")) and is left as a
follow-up.
Fixes: 6da5e537f5af ("KVM: arm64: vgic: Pick EOIcount deactivations from AP-list tail")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Yuchao Zhang <ndaugoing@gmail.com>
---
arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v2.c | 3 +++
arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c | 3 +++
arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c | 10 +++++++---
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v2.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
index 7182f63fc938..7b6cd05ce32d 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
@@ -122,6 +122,9 @@ void vgic_v2_fold_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
for (int lr = 0; lr < vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.used_lrs; lr++)
vgic_v2_fold_lr(vcpu, cpuif->vgic_lr[lr]);
+ if (!eoicount)
+ return;
+
/* See the GICv3 equivalent for the EOIcount handling rationale */
list_for_each_entry_continue(irq, &vgic_cpu->ap_list_head, ap_list) {
u32 lr;
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c
index 726e20a1da6e..c6eb5d9dca2d 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c
@@ -155,6 +155,9 @@ void vgic_v3_fold_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
for (int lr = 0; lr < cpuif->used_lrs; lr++)
vgic_v3_fold_lr(vcpu, cpuif->vgic_lr[lr]);
+ if (!eoicount)
+ return;
+
/*
* EOIMode=0: use EOIcount to emulate deactivation. We are
* guaranteed to deactivate in reverse order of the activation, so
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
index b25303d9919f..0d7d75c3ac93 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
@@ -205,10 +205,12 @@ void vgic_flush_pending_lpis(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
if (irq_is_lpi(vcpu->kvm, irq->intid)) {
raw_spin_lock(&irq->irq_lock);
irq->pending_latch = false;
- list_del(&irq->ap_list);
- irq->vcpu = NULL;
+ if (!irq->on_lr) {
+ list_del(&irq->ap_list);
+ irq->vcpu = NULL;
+ deleted |= vgic_put_irq_norelease(vcpu->kvm, irq);
+ }
raw_spin_unlock(&irq->irq_lock);
- deleted |= vgic_put_irq_norelease(vcpu->kvm, irq);
}
}
@@ -873,6 +875,8 @@ static void vgic_fold_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
vgic_v2_fold_lr_state(vcpu);
else
vgic_v3_fold_lr_state(vcpu);
+
+ *host_data_ptr(last_lr_irq) = NULL;
}
/* Requires the irq_lock to be held. */
--
2.53.0
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-18 2:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-18 2:46 [PATCH 0/1] KVM: arm64: vgic: fix UAF/crash on remote LPI disable zjamg
2026-09-18 2:46 ` zjamg [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260918024620.83869-2-ndaugoing@gmail.com \
--to=ndaugoing@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=fuad.tabba@linux.dev \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®