Re: [PATCH v3 03/11] of: reserved_mem: avoid post-init UAF when alloc_reserved_mem_array() fails

[Wandun <chenwandun1@gmail.com>]

On 6/4/26 01:44, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2026 at 1:44 AM Wandun <chenwandun1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/3/26 00:24, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 11:29:09AM +0800, Wandun Chen wrote:
>>>> From: Wandun Chen <chenwandun@lixiang.com>
>>>>
>>>> The global pointer 'reserved_mem' continues to reference the
>>>> reserved_mem_array which lives in __initdata if
>>>> alloc_reserved_mem_array() fails. of_reserved_mem_lookup() is
>>>> exported for post-init use, that would dereference freed memory
>>>> and trigger a use-after-free.
>>>>
>>>> So reset reserved_mem_count to 0 when alloc_reserved_mem_array()
>>>> fails.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 00c9a452a235 ("of: reserved_mem: Add code to dynamically allocate reserved_mem array")
>>> Fixes should come first in a series.
>> Understood, will do in future submissions.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wandun Chen <chenwandun@lixiang.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
>>>>    1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
>>>> index 313cbc57aa45..6d479381ff1f 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
>>>> @@ -69,29 +69,31 @@ static int __init early_init_dt_alloc_reserved_memory_arch(phys_addr_t size,
>>>>     * the initial static array is copied over to this new array and
>>>>     * the new array is used from this point on.
>>>>     */
>>>> -static void __init alloc_reserved_mem_array(void)
>>>> +static bool __init alloc_reserved_mem_array(void)
>>>>    {
>>>>       struct reserved_mem *new_array;
>>>>       size_t alloc_size, copy_size, memset_size;
>>>>
>>>> +    if (!total_reserved_mem_cnt)
>>>> +            return true;
>>>> +
>>>>       alloc_size = array_size(total_reserved_mem_cnt, sizeof(*new_array));
>>>>       if (alloc_size == SIZE_MAX) {
>>>>               pr_err("Failed to allocate memory for reserved_mem array with err: %d", -EOVERFLOW);
>>>> -            return;
>>>> +            goto fail;
>>>>       }
>>>>
>>>>       new_array = memblock_alloc(alloc_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>>       if (!new_array) {
>>>>               pr_err("Failed to allocate memory for reserved_mem array with err: %d", -ENOMEM);
>>>> -            return;
>>>> +            goto fail;
>>>>       }
>>>>
>>>>       copy_size = array_size(reserved_mem_count, sizeof(*new_array));
>>>>       if (copy_size == SIZE_MAX) {
>>>>               memblock_free(new_array, alloc_size);
>>>> -            total_reserved_mem_cnt = MAX_RESERVED_REGIONS;
>>>>               pr_err("Failed to allocate memory for reserved_mem array with err: %d", -EOVERFLOW);
>>> These prints could be moved to 'fail'. Perhaps instead of just printing
>>> an error value, you can return the error value instead of boolean.
>> Will do, consolidating pr_err() under 'fail' and changing the return type
>> to int.
>>> If you respin just this patch, I can pick it up for 7.2.
>> Before I respin, I'd like to flag a dependency:
>> patch 05/07 in this series build on the signature change introduced by this
>> patch ("the void -> bool return type change of alloc_reserved_mem_array()")
>>
>> Could you let me know which of the following you'd prefer:
>> a) Take patch 03 alone via your tree as you suggested, after it lands, I'll
>>      respin the remaining patches of this series.
> I would go with this option. AIUI, this series isn't going to land in
> 7.2, so ultimately you will rebase on v7.2-rc1 which will have the
> fix.
OK, will send v4.

Best regards,
Wandun
>
>> b) Keep patch 03 in the v4 respin of the full series, reordered to the front
>>      per your earlier comment.
>
> Rob