Registering the same notifier to a hook repeatedly can cause the hook
list to form a ring or lose other members of the list.

case1: An infinite loop in notifier_chain_register() can cause soft lockup
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test1);
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test1);
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test2);

case2: An infinite loop in notifier_chain_register() can cause soft lockup
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test1);
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test1);
        atomic_notifier_call_chain(&test_notifier_list, 0, NULL);

case3: lose other hook test2
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test1);
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test2);
        atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test1);

case4: Unregister returns 0, but the hook is still in the linked list,
        and it is not really registered. If you call notifier_call_chain
        after ko is unloaded, it will trigger oops.

If the system is configured with softlockup_panic and the same
hook is repeatedly registered on the panic_notifier_list, it
will cause a loop panic.

Add a check in notifier_chain_register(),
Intercepting duplicate registrations to avoid infinite loops

Signed-off-by: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaom...@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Vasily Averin <v...@virtuozzo.com>
---
 kernel/notifier.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/notifier.c b/kernel/notifier.c
index d9f5081..30bedb8 100644
--- a/kernel/notifier.c
+++ b/kernel/notifier.c
@@ -23,7 +23,10 @@ static int notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block 
**nl,
                struct notifier_block *n)
 {
        while ((*nl) != NULL) {
-               WARN_ONCE(((*nl) == n), "double register detected");
+               if (unlikely((*nl) == n)) {
+                       WARN(1, "double register detected");
+                       return 0;
+               }
                if (n->priority > (*nl)->priority)
                        break;
                nl = &((*nl)->next);
-- 
1.8.5.6

Reply via email to