ghsa-whrp-vxvh-9rj2
Vulnerability from github
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
riscv: Flush current cpu icache before other cpus
On SiFive Unmatched, I recently fell onto the following BUG when booting:
[ 0.000000] ftrace: allocating 36610 entries in 144 pages
[ 0.000000] Oops - illegal instruction [#1]
[ 0.000000] Modules linked in:
[ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 5.13.1+ #5
[ 0.000000] Hardware name: SiFive HiFive Unmatched A00 (DT)
[ 0.000000] epc : riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask+0x6/0xae
[ 0.000000] ra : __sbi_rfence_v02+0xc8/0x10a
[ 0.000000] epc : ffffffff80007240 ra : ffffffff80009964 sp : ffffffff81803e10
[ 0.000000] gp : ffffffff81a1ea70 tp : ffffffff8180f500 t0 : ffffffe07fe30000
[ 0.000000] t1 : 0000000000000004 t2 : 0000000000000000 s0 : ffffffff81803e60
[ 0.000000] s1 : 0000000000000000 a0 : ffffffff81a22238 a1 : ffffffff81803e10
[ 0.000000] a2 : 0000000000000000 a3 : 0000000000000000 a4 : 0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : ffffffff8000989c a7 : 0000000052464e43
[ 0.000000] s2 : ffffffff81a220c8 s3 : 0000000000000000 s4 : 0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] s5 : 0000000000000000 s6 : 0000000200000100 s7 : 0000000000000001
[ 0.000000] s8 : ffffffe07fe04040 s9 : ffffffff81a22c80 s10: 0000000000001000
[ 0.000000] s11: 0000000000000004 t3 : 0000000000000001 t4 : 0000000000000008
[ 0.000000] t5 : ffffffcf04000808 t6 : ffffffe3ffddf188
[ 0.000000] status: 0000000200000100 badaddr: 0000000000000000 cause: 0000000000000002
[ 0.000000] [
While ftrace is looping over a list of addresses to patch, it always failed when patching the same function: riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask. Looking at the backtrace, the illegal instruction is encountered in this same function. However, patch_text_nosync, after patching the instructions, calls flush_icache_range. But looking at what happens in this function:
flush_icache_range -> flush_icache_all -> sbi_remote_fence_i -> __sbi_rfence_v02 -> riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask
The icache and dcache of the current cpu are never synchronized between the patching of riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask and calling this same function.
So fix this by flushing the current cpu's icache before asking for the other cpus to do the same.
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2021-47414" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2024-05-21T15:15:26Z", "severity": null }, "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nriscv: Flush current cpu icache before other cpus\n\nOn SiFive Unmatched, I recently fell onto the following BUG when booting:\n\n[ 0.000000] ftrace: allocating 36610 entries in 144 pages\n[ 0.000000] Oops - illegal instruction [#1]\n[ 0.000000] Modules linked in:\n[ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 5.13.1+ #5\n[ 0.000000] Hardware name: SiFive HiFive Unmatched A00 (DT)\n[ 0.000000] epc : riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask+0x6/0xae\n[ 0.000000] ra : __sbi_rfence_v02+0xc8/0x10a\n[ 0.000000] epc : ffffffff80007240 ra : ffffffff80009964 sp : ffffffff81803e10\n[ 0.000000] gp : ffffffff81a1ea70 tp : ffffffff8180f500 t0 : ffffffe07fe30000\n[ 0.000000] t1 : 0000000000000004 t2 : 0000000000000000 s0 : ffffffff81803e60\n[ 0.000000] s1 : 0000000000000000 a0 : ffffffff81a22238 a1 : ffffffff81803e10\n[ 0.000000] a2 : 0000000000000000 a3 : 0000000000000000 a4 : 0000000000000000\n[ 0.000000] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : ffffffff8000989c a7 : 0000000052464e43\n[ 0.000000] s2 : ffffffff81a220c8 s3 : 0000000000000000 s4 : 0000000000000000\n[ 0.000000] s5 : 0000000000000000 s6 : 0000000200000100 s7 : 0000000000000001\n[ 0.000000] s8 : ffffffe07fe04040 s9 : ffffffff81a22c80 s10: 0000000000001000\n[ 0.000000] s11: 0000000000000004 t3 : 0000000000000001 t4 : 0000000000000008\n[ 0.000000] t5 : ffffffcf04000808 t6 : ffffffe3ffddf188\n[ 0.000000] status: 0000000200000100 badaddr: 0000000000000000 cause: 0000000000000002\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff80007240\u003e] riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask+0x6/0xae\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff80009474\u003e] sbi_remote_fence_i+0x1e/0x26\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff8000b8f4\u003e] flush_icache_all+0x12/0x1a\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff8000666c\u003e] patch_text_nosync+0x26/0x32\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff8000884e\u003e] ftrace_init_nop+0x52/0x8c\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff800f051e\u003e] ftrace_process_locs.isra.0+0x29c/0x360\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff80a0e3c6\u003e] ftrace_init+0x80/0x130\n[ 0.000000] [\u003cffffffff80a00f8c\u003e] start_kernel+0x5c4/0x8f6\n[ 0.000000] ---[ end trace f67eb9af4d8d492b ]---\n[ 0.000000] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!\n[ 0.000000] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---\n\nWhile ftrace is looping over a list of addresses to patch, it always failed\nwhen patching the same function: riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask. Looking at the\nbacktrace, the illegal instruction is encountered in this same function.\nHowever, patch_text_nosync, after patching the instructions, calls\nflush_icache_range. But looking at what happens in this function:\n\nflush_icache_range -\u003e flush_icache_all\n -\u003e sbi_remote_fence_i\n -\u003e __sbi_rfence_v02\n -\u003e riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask\n\nThe icache and dcache of the current cpu are never synchronized between the\npatching of riscv_cpuid_to_hartid_mask and calling this same function.\n\nSo fix this by flushing the current cpu\u0027s icache before asking for the other\ncpus to do the same.", "id": "GHSA-whrp-vxvh-9rj2", "modified": "2024-05-21T15:31:45Z", "published": "2024-05-21T15:31:45Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-47414" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/427faa29e06f0709476ea1bd59758f997ec8b64e" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/bb8958d5dc79acbd071397abb57b8756375fe1ce" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f1c7aa87c423e765e3862349c2f095fdfccdd9b3" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [] }
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.