CVE-2024-35818
13h23 +00:00
Mô tả CVE
LoongArch: Define the __io_aw() hook as mmiowb()
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: LoongArch: Define the __io_aw() hook as mmiowb() Commit fb24ea52f78e0d595852e ("drivers: Remove explicit invocations of mmiowb()") remove all mmiowb() in drivers, but it says: "NOTE: mmiowb() has only ever guaranteed ordering in conjunction with spin_unlock(). However, pairing each mmiowb() removal in this patch with the corresponding call to spin_unlock() is not at all trivial, so there is a small chance that this change may regress any drivers incorrectly relying on mmiowb() to order MMIO writes between CPUs using lock-free synchronisation." The mmio in radeon_ring_commit() is protected by a mutex rather than a spinlock, but in the mutex fastpath it behaves similar to spinlock. We can add mmiowb() calls in the radeon driver but the maintainer says he doesn't like such a workaround, and radeon is not the only example of mutex protected mmio. So we should extend the mmiowb tracking system from spinlock to mutex, and maybe other locking primitives. This is not easy and error prone, so we solve it in the architectural code, by simply defining the __io_aw() hook as mmiowb(). And we no longer need to override queued_spin_unlock() so use the generic definition. Without this, we get such an error when run 'glxgears' on weak ordering architectures such as LoongArch: radeon 0000:04:00.0: ring 0 stalled for more than 10324msec radeon 0000:04:00.0: ring 3 stalled for more than 10240msec radeon 0000:04:00.0: GPU lockup (current fence id 0x000000000001f412 last fence id 0x000000000001f414 on ring 3) radeon 0000:04:00.0: GPU lockup (current fence id 0x000000000000f940 last fence id 0x000000000000f941 on ring 0) radeon 0000:04:00.0: scheduling IB failed (-35). [drm:radeon_gem_va_ioctl [radeon]] *ERROR* Couldn't update BO_VA (-35) radeon 0000:04:00.0: scheduling IB failed (-35). [drm:radeon_gem_va_ioctl [radeon]] *ERROR* Couldn't update BO_VA (-35) radeon 0000:04:00.0: scheduling IB failed (-35). [drm:radeon_gem_va_ioctl [radeon]] *ERROR* Couldn't update BO_VA (-35) radeon 0000:04:00.0: scheduling IB failed (-35). [drm:radeon_gem_va_ioctl [radeon]] *ERROR* Couldn't update BO_VA (-35) radeon 0000:04:00.0: scheduling IB failed (-35). [drm:radeon_gem_va_ioctl [radeon]] *ERROR* Couldn't update BO_VA (-35) radeon 0000:04:00.0: scheduling IB failed (-35). [drm:radeon_gem_va_ioctl [radeon]] *ERROR* Couldn't update BO_VA (-35) radeon 0000:04:00.0: scheduling IB failed (-35). [drm:radeon_gem_va_ioctl [radeon]] *ERROR* Couldn't update BO_VA (-35)Thông tin CVE
Điểm yếu liên quan
| Tên điểm yếu | Nguồn | |
|---|---|---|
| Improper Locking The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors. |
Số liệu
| Số liệu | Điểm | Mức độ nghiêm trọng | CVSS Vector | Nguồn |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Thêm thông tin
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Local The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope MetricsThe Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact MetricsThe Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable). Temporal MetricsThe Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental MetricsThese metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. |
nvd@nist.gov |
EPSS
Điểm EPSS
Phân vị EPSS
Sản phẩm được đề cập
Cấu hình 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 5.19 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.1.84
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.2 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.6.24
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.7 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.7.12
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.8 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.8.3
