Hi Kishon, This is the crash log. I think you can reproduce this problem by loading and unloading the pci-epf-test modules some times, but I don't think you'll see similar logs in your environment. The pci_ep_cfs_remove_epf_group function calls kfree for the `group`, however a member of group, `group_entry``, is accessed by a list_del() after the loop. The patch changes to remove list entries to prevent the accessing after freed object. Thanks, Shunsuke 2021年12月7日(火) 16:44 Shunsuke Mie : > > Hi Kishon, > > 2021年12月7日(火) 16:26 Kishon Vijay Abraham I : > > > > Hi Shunsuke, > > > > On 21/06/21 12:30 pm, Shunsuke Mie wrote: > > > All of entries are freed in a loop, however, the freed entry is accessed > > > by list_del() after the loop. > > > > > > When epf driver that includes pci-epf-test unload, the pci_epf_remove_cfs() > > > is called, and occurred the use after free. Therefore, kernel panics > > > randomly after or while the module unloading. > > > > > > I tested this patch with r8a77951-Salvator-xs boards. > > > > Can you provide the crash dump? > Ok. However, that is use-after-free bug. so, the crash log is changed randomly. > I'll send some crash dumps. > > > > > > Fixes: ef1433f ("PCI: endpoint: Create configfs entry for each pci_epf_device_id table entry") > > > Signed-off-by: Shunsuke Mie > > > --- > > > drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epf-core.c | 4 +++- > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epf-core.c b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epf-core.c > > > index e9289d10f822..538e902b0ba6 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epf-core.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epf-core.c > > > @@ -202,8 +202,10 @@ static void pci_epf_remove_cfs(struct pci_epf_driver *driver) > > > return; > > > > > > mutex_lock(&pci_epf_mutex); > > > - list_for_each_entry_safe(group, tmp, &driver->epf_group, group_entry) > > > + list_for_each_entry_safe(group, tmp, &driver->epf_group, group_entry) { > > > + list_del(&group->group_entry); > > > > Need full crash dump to see if this is really required or not. Ideally this > > should be handled by configfs (or a configfs API could be used). > > > > Thanks, > > Kishon