Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 12 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Calling `dma_map_sgtable()` on a scatterlist with a `NULL` page pointer will overwrite the manual DMA address and cause a kernel panic for static VPRs.
- [High] Memory allocated with `kvmalloc_array()` is incorrectly freed with `kfree()`, which will cause a SLUB BUG or kernel panic if it falls back to `vmalloc()`.
- [High] Signed integer overflow in physical address calculation for VPR sizes exceeding ~2 GiB.
- [High] Unconditional CMA initialization on `no-map` reserved memory will cause a kernel panic.
- [High] SMCCC calling convention truncates 64-bit physical addresses to 32 bits.
- [High] Race condition and framework abuse by calling `pm_generic_freeze()` at runtime without acquiring the device lock.
- [High] Dereferencing `dev->driver` when calling `tegra_vpr_device_init()` will cause a boot-time kernel panic.
- [Medium] Missing locking in `tegra_vpr_debugfs_show_chunks` leads to use-after-free and list corruption.
- [Medium] Memory and OF node leaks on the error path of `tegra_vpr_add_heap()`.
- [Medium] Off-by-one error prevents allocation of the last VPR page.
- [Low] Missing Kconfig dependencies for `ARM_SMCCC` will cause compilation and link errors on unsupported architectures.
- [Low] The use of `DECLARE_BITMAP(dirty, vpr->num_chunks)` creates a Variable Length Array (VLA), which is forbidden in the kernel.
--
--- Patch [7]: [PATCH v5 07/10] dma-buf: heaps: Add support for Tegra VPR ---
commit 4503ba247ad23e5d232fb07fec29334ba71260ab
Author: Thierry Reding [off-list ref]
Subject: dma-buf: heaps: Add support for Tegra VPR
This commit introduces a new DMA-BUF heap for the NVIDIA Tegra
Video-Protection-Region (VPR). It exposes VPR memory, which is restricted
from CPU access, to drivers and applications that handle content-protected
video. The heap supports both static and resizable VPR configurations.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig
index bb729e91545c4..8909330bfaa2a 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig
@@ -20,3 +20,15 @@ config DMABUF_HEAPS_CMA
+config DMABUF_HEAPS_TEGRA_VPR
+ bool "NVIDIA Tegra Video-Protected-Region DMA-BUF Heap"
+ depends on DMABUF_HEAPS && DMA_CMA
[Severity: Low]
Is it possible for this driver to be compiled on unsupported architectures?
The driver uses arm_smccc_smc(), which relies on __arm_smccc_smc. This is
only implemented on ARM/ARM64.
Without an ARM_SMCCC or ARCH_TEGRA dependency, this could lead to unresolved
symbol linker failures on other architectures like x86.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/tegra-vpr.c b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/tegra-vpr.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..c8d9f9c66dded
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/tegra-vpr.c
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -112,6 +112,6 @@ struct tegra_vpr_attachment {
+#define ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_SIP_TE_PROGRAM_VPR_FUNC_ID \
+ ARM_SMCCC_CALL_VAL(ARM_SMCCC_FAST_CALL, \
+ ARM_SMCCC_SMC_32, \
+ ARM_SMCCC_OWNER_SIP, \
+ ARM_SMCCC_TE_FUNC_PROGRAM_VPR)
[Severity: High]
Does the use of ARM_SMCCC_SMC_32 truncate the physical addresses passed to
the secure monitor?
When passing 64-bit phys_addr_t arguments for base and size in
tegra_vpr_set(), the SMC32 convention truncates them to 32 bits.
This might cause the secure monitor to program the VPR to an incorrect
memory location.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -166,5 +166,5 @@ static int tegra_vpr_resize(struct tegra_vpr *vpr)
+ list_for_each_entry(node, &vpr->devices, node) {
+ err = pm_generic_freeze(node->dev);
[Severity: High]
Is it safe to call pm_generic_freeze() here without acquiring the device
lock?
Calling it directly without holding device_lock() can race with concurrent
runtime PM transitions, device removal, or unbind operations.
Could this lead to crashes if dev->driver is cleared concurrently?
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -365,3 +365,3 @@ static int tegra_vpr_activate_chunks(struct tegra_vpr *vpr,
+{
+ DECLARE_BITMAP(dirty, vpr->num_chunks);
[Severity: Low]
Does this declaration create a Variable Length Array (VLA)?
Because vpr->num_chunks is a struct member evaluated at runtime, this
creates a VLA on the stack. Since the kernel is compiled with -Werror=vla,
this will result in a build failure.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -498,4 +498,4 @@ static int tegra_vpr_find_free_region(struct tegra_vpr *vpr,
+{
+ return tegra_vpr_find_free_region_in_range(vpr, 0, vpr->num_pages - 1,
+ num_pages, align);
[Severity: Medium]
Will passing vpr->num_pages - 1 prevent the allocation of the last VPR page?
Looking at tegra_vpr_find_free_region_in_range(), the loop condition is
pos + num_pages <= end_page.
If end_page is decremented by 1, it seems it will incorrectly exclude the
final page from ever being allocated.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -642,3 +642,3 @@ tegra_vpr_buffer_allocate(struct tegra_vpr *vpr, size_t size)
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&buffer->list);
+ mutex_init(&buffer->lock);
+ buffer->start = vpr->base + (pageno << PAGE_SHIFT);
[Severity: High]
Can this calculation overflow for VPR sizes exceeding 2 GiB?
Because pageno is a signed 32-bit int, pageno << PAGE_SHIFT can overflow
and become a negative value before being promoted and added to the 64-bit
phys_addr_t vpr->base.
This could yield a completely incorrect DMA address.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -654,4 +654,4 @@ tegra_vpr_buffer_allocate(struct tegra_vpr *vpr, size_t size)
+ buffer->pages = kvmalloc_array(buffer->num_pages,
+ sizeof(*buffer->pages),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!buffer->pages) {
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -672,3 +672,3 @@ free:
+ kfree(buffer->pages);
+release:
[Severity: High]
Should this be kvfree() instead of kfree()?
Memory allocated with kvmalloc_array() might fall back to vmalloc().
If that happens, calling kfree() on a vmalloc address will cause a SLUB BUG
or kernel panic during virt_to_page() translation.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -728,4 +728,4 @@ static void tegra_vpr_buffer_release(struct tegra_vpr_buffer *buffer)
+ bitmap_clear(vpr->bitmap, buffer->pageno, buffer->num_pages);
+ list_del(&buffer->list);
+ kfree(buffer->pages);
[Severity: High]
Similarly, should this teardown path also use kvfree() to release
buffer->pages since it was allocated using kvmalloc_array()?
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -785,4 +785,4 @@ tegra_vpr_map_dma_buf(struct dma_buf_attachment *attachment,
+
+ err = dma_map_sgtable(attachment->dev, sgt, direction,
+ DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC);
[Severity: High]
Can this crash for static VPR configurations?
In the static VPR case, the scatterlist is populated with a NULL page
pointer.
Unconditionally calling dma_map_sgtable() here will cause the DMA framework
to iterate over the scatterlist and dereference the NULL page pointer. This
could corrupt the DMA address or cause a kernel panic.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -796,4 +796,4 @@ static void tegra_vpr_unmap_dma_buf(struct dma_buf_attachment *attachment,
+{
+ dma_unmap_sgtable(attachment->dev, sgt, direction,
+ DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC);
[Severity: High]
This appears to have the same issue as the mapping path. Calling
dma_unmap_sgtable() unconditionally attempts to unmap a NULL-paged
scatterlist, which could lead to a panic.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -800,3 +800,3 @@ static void tegra_vpr_recycle(struct tegra_vpr *vpr)
+{
+ DECLARE_BITMAP(dirty, vpr->num_chunks);
[Severity: Low]
Does this declaration also create a Variable Length Array (VLA) on the
stack? This will similarly cause a build failure under -Werror=vla.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -1048,4 +1048,4 @@ static void tegra_vpr_debugfs_show_chunks(struct tegra_vpr *vpr,
+
+ list_for_each_entry(buffer, &vpr->buffers, list) {
+ string_get_size(buffer->size, 1, STRING_UNITS_2, buf,
[Severity: Medium]
Should this list iteration be protected by vpr->lock?
Iterating over vpr->buffers without the lock can race with concurrent
dma-buf allocations or frees, potentially leading to a use-after-free or a
panic from list corruption.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -1199,6 +1199,6 @@ static int tegra_vpr_add_heap(struct reserved_mem *rmem,
+
+cleanup:
+ if (vpr->resizable)
+ tegra_vpr_free_chunks(vpr);
+free:
+ bitmap_free(vpr->bitmap);
+ kfree(vpr);
+ return err;
[Severity: Medium]
Are there a couple of resource leaks on this error path?
If dma_heap_add() fails, tegra_vpr_free_chunks() is called, but it looks
like the vpr->active bitmap is never freed.
Additionally, it seems the device node reference acquired via of_node_get()
is not released with of_node_put(vpr->dev_node).
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -1305,4 +1305,4 @@ static int __init tegra_vpr_node_init(unsigned long offset,
+
+ err = cma_init_reserved_mem(rmem->base, rmem->size, 0, rmem->name,
+ &cma);
[Severity: High]
Will this cause a panic for static VPRs?
Static VPRs use the "no-map" property, which removes the memory from the
linear map and prevents struct page creation.
However, this calls cma_init_reserved_mem() unconditionally, and CMA
expects struct page to be present when initializing pageblocks.
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -1359,3 +1359,3 @@ static int tegra_vpr_device_init(struct reserved_mem *rmem, struct device *dev)
+{
+ const struct dev_pm_ops *pm = dev->driver->pm;
[Severity: High]
Can this unconditionally dereference a NULL pointer?
This function acts as the device_init callback for reserved memory
operations. When devices are instantiated and memory regions are attached
via of_dma_configure_id(), this callback is invoked before a driver is
matched or bound to the device.
This means dev->driver would be NULL here.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260814-tegra-vpr-v5-0-71832b5d0246@nvidia.com?part=7