CVE-2022-49943

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

USB: gadget: Fix obscure lockdep violation for udc_mutex

A recent commit expanding the scope of the udc_lock mutex in the gadget core managed to cause an obscure and slightly bizarre lockdep violation. In abbreviated form:

====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.19.0-rc7+ #12510 Not tainted

udevadm/312 is trying to acquire lock: ffff80000aae1058 (udc_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: usb_udc_uevent+0x54/0xe0

but task is already holding lock: ffff000002277548 (kn->active#4){++++}-{0:0}, at: kernfs_seq_start+0x34/0xe0

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #3 (kn->active#4){++++}-{0:0}:        lock_acquire+0x68/0x84        __kernfs_remove+0x268/0x380        kernfs_remove_by_name_ns+0x58/0xac        sysfs_remove_file_ns+0x18/0x24        device_del+0x15c/0x440

-> #2 (device_links_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:        lock_acquire+0x68/0x84        __mutex_lock+0x9c/0x430        mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x64        device_link_remove+0x3c/0xa0        _regulator_put.part.0+0x168/0x190        regulator_put+0x3c/0x54        devm_regulator_release+0x14/0x20

-> #1 (regulator_list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:        lock_acquire+0x68/0x84        __mutex_lock+0x9c/0x430        mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x64        regulator_lock_dependent+0x54/0x284        regulator_enable+0x34/0x80        phy_power_on+0x24/0x130        __dwc2_lowlevel_hw_enable+0x100/0x130        dwc2_lowlevel_hw_enable+0x18/0x40        dwc2_hsotg_udc_start+0x6c/0x2f0        gadget_bind_driver+0x124/0x1f4

-> #0 (udc_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:        __lock_acquire+0x1298/0x20cc        lock_acquire.part.0+0xe0/0x230        lock_acquire+0x68/0x84        __mutex_lock+0x9c/0x430        mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x64        usb_udc_uevent+0x54/0xe0

Evidently this was caused by the scope of udc_mutex being too large. The mutex is only meant to protect udc->driver along with a few other things. As far as I can tell, theres no reason for the mutex to be held while the gadget core calls a gadget drivers ->bind or ->unbind routine, or while a UDC is being started or stopped. (This accounts for link #1 in the chain above, where the mutex is held while the dwc2_hsotg_udc is started as part of driver probing.)

Gadget drivers ->disconnect callbacks are problematic. Even though usb_gadget_disconnect() will now acquire the udc_mutex, theres a window in usb_gadget_bind_driver() between the times when the mutex is released and the ->bind callback is invoked. If a disconnect occurred during that window, we could call the drivers ->disconnect routine before its ->bind routine. To prevent this from happening, it will be necessary to prevent a UDC from connecting while it has no gadget driver. This should be done already but it doesnt seem to be; currently usb_gadget_connect() has no check for this. Such a check will have to be added later.

Some degree of mutual exclusion is required in soft_connect_store(), which can dereference udc->driver at arbitrary times since it is a sysfs callback. The solution here is to acquire the gadgets device lock rather than the udc_mutex. Since the driver core guarantees that the device lock is always held during driver binding and unbinding, this will make the accesses in soft_connect_store() mutually exclusive with any changes to udc->driver.

Lastly, it turns out there is one place which should hold the udc_mutex but currently does not: The function_show() routine needs protection while it dereferences udc->driver. The missing lock and unlock calls are added.

Weakness

The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors.

Affected Software

Extended Description

Locking is a type of synchronization behavior that ensures that multiple independently-operating processes or threads do not interfere with each other when accessing the same resource. All processes/threads are expected to follow the same steps for locking. If these steps are not followed precisely - or if no locking is done at all - then another process/thread could modify the shared resource in a way that is not visible or predictable to the original process. This can lead to data or memory corruption, denial of service, etc.

Potential Mitigations

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/25.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/26.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/27.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1016fc0c096c92dd0e6e0541daac7a7868169903
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1a065e4673cbdd9f222a05f85e17d78ea50c8d9c