linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usb/core/devio.c: Don't use GFP_KERNEL while we cannot reset a storage device

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 8 Mar 2013 21:59:29 -0500 (EST)
From:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
cc:	Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
	USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<ldv-project@...uxtesting.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb/core/devio.c: Don't use GFP_KERNEL while we cannot
 reset a storage device

On Fri, 8 Mar 2013, Oliver Neukum wrote:

> On Friday 08 March 2013 12:55:08 Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
> > 
> > > As it was described by Oliver Neukum in commit acbe2fe
> > > "USB: Don't use GFP_KERNEL while we cannot reset a storage device":
> > > 
> > >   Memory allocations with GFP_KERNEL can cause IO to a storage device
> > >   which can fail resulting in a need to reset the device. Therefore
> > >   GFP_KERNEL cannot be safely used between usb_lock_device()
> > >   and usb_unlock_device(). Replace by GFP_NOIO.
> > > 
> > > The patch fixes the same issue in usb/core/devio.c.
> > > All the allocations fixed are under usb_lock_device() from usbdev_do_ioctl().
> > > 
> > > Found by Linux Driver Verification project (linuxtesting.org).
> > 
> > I don't know if this is a good idea.  People can and do submit 
> > transfers requiring a lot of buffer space.  Switching to GFP_NOIO 
> > will make those allocations a lot more likely to fail.
> > 
> > Oliver, what do you think?
> 
> Ideally we'd split memory allocation and use, by it fixes a bug.
> Better allocation failure than deadlock.

In fact we wouldn't deadlock.  This is because 
usb_lock_device_for_reset() gives up if it can't obtain the device lock 
after one second of trying.  We'd just end up with a failure to reset, 
leading to an I/O failure.

Probably the mass-storage device would be taken off-line...  but there
wouldn't be a deadlock.  Under the circumstances, I'd say that the 
consequences of merging this patch would be worse than the consequences 
of keeping things as they are now.

Alan Stern

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/