Re: [PATCH v3] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: Fix resource leaks as part of channel clean up
flat view
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Date: 2026-08-19 11:56:59
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider: New issues: - [Medium] Inconsistent software state after channel rollback causes duplicate shutdown commands and timeouts during client teardown. Pre-existing issues: - [Critical] gpi_free_chan_resources() unconditionally frees ev_ring, causing a double-free crash when an initialization failure occurs. - [Critical] Hardware event ring is not deallocated in the gpi_ch_init() error path, causing a permanent DMA Use-After-Free. - [High] Event processing tasklet is not killed before freeing ev_ring in the error path, leading to a Use-After-Free. --
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v3] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: Fix resource leaks as part of channel clean up ---commit f50a0a6a0fc075e17ad27e65c7651c6aa5bb6a12 Author: Aniket Randive [off-list ref] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: Fix resource leaks as part of channel clean up This commit fixes the gpi_ch_init() and gpi_alloc_chan_resources() error handling paths to properly iterate over the sibling channels, release the ch_ring when channel initialization fails, and restore the event ring state after freeing the ring. Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260810-gpi_bug_fix-v2-1-60555394cbf9@oss.qualcomm.com (local)
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c index a5055a6273af6..c41bfac65ddf3 100644 --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -1965,16 +1965,19 @@ static int gpi_ch_init(struct gchan *gchan) error_start_chan: for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--) { gpi_stop_chan(&gpii->gchan[i]); - gpi_send_cmd(gpii, gchan, GPI_CH_CMD_RESET); + gpi_send_cmd(gpii, &gpii->gchan[i], GPI_CH_CMD_RESET); }
[Severity: Medium]
Does this sequence leave the sibling channel's software state inconsistent?
When gpi_start_chan() fails for the second channel, this loop correctly
rolls back the sibling channel in hardware by sending the STOP, RESET, and
DE_ALLOC commands.
However, it appears to leave the sibling's pm_state as ACTIVE_STATE.
During client teardown, gpi_free_chan_resources() observes ACTIVE_STATE
and incorrectly re-issues these commands to the hardware:
gpi_free_chan_resources() {
...
if (cur_state == ACTIVE_STATE) {
...
gpi_send_cmd(gpii, gchan, GPI_CH_CMD_STOP);
}
}
Because the hardware is already deallocated, do the commands time out
in wait_for_completion_timeout() and cause a blocking delay regression?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
i = 2; error_alloc_chan: for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--) - gpi_reset_chan(gchan, GPI_CH_CMD_DE_ALLOC); + gpi_reset_chan(&gpii->gchan[i], GPI_CH_CMD_DE_ALLOC); error_alloc_ev_ring: gpi_disable_interrupts(gpii);
[Severity: High] This is a pre-existing issue, but does this error path need to kill the event processing tasklet before proceeding to free the ring? If an error occurs after gpi_alloc_ev_chan() succeeds, a hardware interrupt could fire and schedule ev_task. A concurrently executing tasklet might read from the freed ev_ring DMA memory before pm_state is updated. Would calling tasklet_kill(&gpii->ev_task) before freeing the ring prevent this regression where memory is used after being freed?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
error_config_int: gpi_free_ring(&gpii->ev_ring, gpii); + write_lock_irq(&gpii->pm_lock); + gpii->pm_state = DISABLE_STATE; + write_unlock_irq(&gpii->pm_lock);
[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but is the hardware event ring deallocated
before we free its memory here?
If the error path frees ev_ring without sending the GPI_EV_CMD_DEALLOC
command, the hardware might continue writing events to the freed memory.
Additionally, does setting pm_state to DISABLE_STATE bypass the fallback
cleanup in gpi_free_chan_resources()?
gpi_free_chan_resources() {
...
if (cur_state == ACTIVE_STATE)
gpi_send_cmd(gpii, NULL, GPI_EV_CMD_DEALLOC);
}
By forcing the state to DISABLE_STATE, it seems the fallback DEALLOC
is prevented when the sibling channel is cleaned up, potentially making what
was previously a race window into a permanent regression of the event ring.
[Severity: Critical]
This is another pre-existing issue, but does freeing the event ring here
cause a regression by freeing the resource twice later?
When gpi_free_ring() is called, it zeroes the ring structure:
gpi_free_ring() {
dma_free_coherent(...);
memset(ring, 0, sizeof(*ring));
}
Later, when the client handles the probe failure and releases the
previously initialized sibling channel, gpi_free_chan_resources()
observes no remaining active channels and unconditionally executes:
gpi_free_ring(&gpii->ev_ring, gpii);
Since the ring properties are now 0 and NULL, does this cause the dma layer
to attempt to free an invalid page?
exit_gpi_init: return ret; }
-- Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260819-gpi_bug_fix-v3-1-4c97333e6f5b@oss.qualcomm.com?part=1