In some cases it is possible for mmu_interval_notifier_remove() to race
with mn_tree_inv_end() allowing it to return while the notifier data
structure is still in use.  Consider the following sequence:

  CPU0 - mn_tree_inv_end()            CPU1 - mmu_interval_notifier_remove()
  ----------------------------------- ------------------------------------
                                      spin_lock(subscriptions->lock);
                                      seq = subscriptions->invalidate_seq;
  spin_lock(subscriptions->lock);     spin_unlock(subscriptions->lock);
  subscriptions->invalidate_seq++;
                                      wait_event(invalidate_seq != seq);
                                      return;
  interval_tree_remove(interval_sub); kfree(interval_sub);
  spin_unlock(subscriptions->lock);
  wake_up_all();

As the wait_event() condition is true it will return immediately.  This
can lead to use-after-free type errors if the caller frees the data
structure containing the interval notifier subscription while it is
still on a deferred list.  Fix this by taking the appropriate lock when
reading invalidate_seq to ensure proper synchronisation.

I observed this whilst running stress testing during some development.
You do have to be pretty unlucky, but it leads to the usual problems of
use-after-free (memory corruption, kernel crash, difficult to diagnose
WARN_ON, etc).

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220420043734.476348-1-apopple@nvidia.com
Fixes: 99cb252f5e68 ("mm/mmu_notifier: add an interval tree notifier")
Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Cc: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>