All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ewan D. Milne" <emilne@redhat.com>
To: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
	Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>,
	"zhaohongjiang@huawei.com" <zhaohongjiang@huawei.com>,
	"jthumshirn@suse.de" <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
	"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	"hare@suse.de" <hare@suse.de>,
	"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"yanaijie@huawei.com" <yanaijie@huawei.com>,
	"jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"miaoxie@huawei.com" <miaoxie@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: fix race condition when removing target
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:49:55 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1511981395.30220.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171129173947.GC20581@kroah.com>

On Wed, 2017-11-29 at 17:39 +0000, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 05:20:50PM +0100, hch@lst.de wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 04:18:30PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > As the above patch description shows it can happen that the SCSI core calls
> > > get_device() after the device reference count has reached zero and before
> > > the memory for struct device is freed. Although the above patch looks fine
> > > to me, would you consider it acceptable to modify get_device() such that it
> > > uses kobject_get_unless_zero() instead of kobject_get()? I'm asking this
> > > because that change would help to reduce the complexity of the already too
> > > complicated SCSI core.
> > 
> > I don't think we can just modify get_device, but we can add a new
> > get_device_unless_zero.  In fact I have an open coded variant of that
> > in nvme, and was planning to submit one for the current merge window..
> 
> I feel like that is just delaying the real fix, shouldn't there be a bus
> lock somewhere on the put_device path for this bus to prevent this?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Why is it that clients of the kobject code have to have their own
lock / state checking to prevent a duplicate destructor callback?
It seems to me like this is something the core functionality should
provide, because a get inside a destructor would *always* be wrong, no?

It looks like:

void refcount_inc(refcount_t *r)
{
        WARN_ONCE(!refcount_inc_not_zero(r), "refcount_t: increment on 0; use-after-free.\n");
}

would have warned if CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL was on, I/we don't normally
enable that though.

-Ewan

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-29 18:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-29  3:05 [PATCH] scsi: fix race condition when removing target Jason Yan
2017-11-29  7:41 ` Hannes Reinecke
2017-11-29 16:18 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 16:20   ` hch
2017-11-29 17:39     ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-30  1:18       ` Jason Yan
2017-11-30 16:08         ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-30 16:40           ` gregkh
2017-11-30 23:56           ` James Bottomley
2017-12-01  1:12             ` Finn Thain
2017-12-01  8:40             ` Jason Yan
2017-12-01 14:41               ` Ewan D. Milne
2017-12-01 15:35               ` James Bottomley
2017-12-05 12:37                 ` Jason Yan
2017-12-05 15:37                   ` James Bottomley
2017-12-06  0:41                     ` Jason Yan
2017-12-06  2:07                       ` James Bottomley
2017-12-06  2:43                         ` Jason Yan
2017-11-29 17:39     ` gregkh
2017-11-29 18:49       ` Ewan D. Milne [this message]
2017-11-29 19:11         ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 19:20           ` Ewan D. Milne
2017-11-29 19:50             ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 17:39   ` gregkh
2017-11-29 17:47     ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 16:31 ` James Bottomley
2017-11-29 16:34   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-11-29 16:47     ` James Bottomley
2017-11-29 19:05 ` Ewan D. Milne

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1511981395.30220.6.camel@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=emilne@redhat.com \
    --cc=Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=miaoxie@huawei.com \
    --cc=yanaijie@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhaohongjiang@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.