| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:55:36 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] driver core: Count repeated addition of same device link
On Saturday, February 10, 2018 7:27:12 PM CET Lukas Wunner wrote:
> If device_link_add() is invoked multiple times with the same supplier
> and consumer combo, it will create the link on first addition and
> return a pointer to the already existing link on all subsequent
> additions.
>
> The semantics for device_link_del() are quite different, it deletes
> the link unconditionally, so multiple invocations are not allowed.
>
> In other words, this snippet ...
>
> struct device *dev1, *dev2;
> struct device_link *link1, *link2;
>
> link1 = device_link_add(dev1, dev2, 0);
> link2 = device_link_add(dev1, dev2, 0);
>
> device_link_del(link1);
> device_link_del(link2);
>
> ... causes the following crash:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2686 at drivers/base/power/runtime.c:1611 pm_runtime_drop_link+0x40/0x50
> [...]
> list_del corruption, 0000000039b800a4->prev is LIST_POISON2 (00000000ecf79852)
> kernel BUG at lib/list_debug.c:50!
>
> The issue isn't as arbitrary as it may seem: Imagine a device link
> which is added in both the supplier's and the consumer's ->probe hook.
> The two drivers can't just call device_link_del() in their ->remove hook
> without coordination.
>
> Fix by counting multiple additions and dropping the device link only
> when the last addition is unwound.
>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
> ---
> This issue doesn't break any use cases of mine, it's just something that
> I found surprising about the API and that might cause trouble for others.
> Hence submitting as RFC.
>
> drivers/base/core.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++--------
> include/linux/device.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c
> index 5847364f25d9..b610816eb887 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/core.c
> @@ -196,8 +196,10 @@ struct device_link *device_link_add(struct device *consumer,
> }
>
> list_for_each_entry(link, &supplier->links.consumers, s_node)
> - if (link->consumer == consumer)
> + if (link->consumer == consumer) {
> + kref_get(&link->kref);
> goto out;
> + }
>
> link = kzalloc(sizeof(*link), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!link)
> @@ -222,6 +224,7 @@ struct device_link *device_link_add(struct device *consumer,
> link->consumer = consumer;
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&link->c_node);
> link->flags = flags;
> + kref_init(&link->kref);
>
> /* Determine the initial link state. */
> if (flags & DL_FLAG_STATELESS) {
> @@ -292,8 +295,10 @@ static void __device_link_free_srcu(struct rcu_head *rhead)
> device_link_free(container_of(rhead, struct device_link, rcu_head));
> }
>
> -static void __device_link_del(struct device_link *link)
> +static void __device_link_del(struct kref *kref)
> {
> + struct device_link *link = container_of(kref, struct device_link, kref);
> +
> dev_info(link->consumer, "Dropping the link to %s\n",
> dev_name(link->supplier));
>
> @@ -305,8 +310,10 @@ static void __device_link_del(struct device_link *link)
> call_srcu(&device_links_srcu, &link->rcu_head, __device_link_free_srcu);
> }
> #else /* !CONFIG_SRCU */
> -static void __device_link_del(struct device_link *link)
> +static void __device_link_del(struct kref *kref)
> {
> + struct device_link *link = container_of(kref, struct device_link, kref);
> +
> dev_info(link->consumer, "Dropping the link to %s\n",
> dev_name(link->supplier));
>
> @@ -324,13 +331,15 @@ static void __device_link_del(struct device_link *link)
> * @link: Device link to delete.
> *
> * The caller must ensure proper synchronization of this function with runtime
> - * PM.
> + * PM. If the link was added multiple times, it needs to be deleted as often.
> + * Care is required for hotplugged devices: Their links are purged on removal
> + * and calling device_link_del() is then no longer allowed.
> */
> void device_link_del(struct device_link *link)
> {
> device_links_write_lock();
> device_pm_lock();
> - __device_link_del(link);
> + kref_put(&link->kref, __device_link_del);
> device_pm_unlock();
> device_links_write_unlock();
> }
> @@ -444,7 +453,7 @@ static void __device_links_no_driver(struct device *dev)
> continue;
>
> if (link->flags & DL_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE)
> - __device_link_del(link);
> + kref_put(&link->kref, __device_link_del);
> else if (link->status != DL_STATE_SUPPLIER_UNBIND)
> WRITE_ONCE(link->status, DL_STATE_AVAILABLE);
> }
> @@ -597,13 +606,13 @@ static void device_links_purge(struct device *dev)
>
> list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(link, ln, &dev->links.suppliers, c_node) {
> WARN_ON(link->status == DL_STATE_ACTIVE);
> - __device_link_del(link);
> + __device_link_del(&link->kref);
> }
>
> list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(link, ln, &dev->links.consumers, s_node) {
> WARN_ON(link->status != DL_STATE_DORMANT &&
> link->status != DL_STATE_NONE);
> - __device_link_del(link);
> + __device_link_del(&link->kref);
> }
>
> device_links_write_unlock();
> diff --git a/include/linux/device.h b/include/linux/device.h
> index b093405ed525..abf952c82c6d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/device.h
> +++ b/include/linux/device.h
> @@ -769,6 +769,7 @@ enum device_link_state {
> * @status: The state of the link (with respect to the presence of drivers).
> * @flags: Link flags.
> * @rpm_active: Whether or not the consumer device is runtime-PM-active.
> + * @kref: Count repeated addition of the same link.
> * @rcu_head: An RCU head to use for deferred execution of SRCU callbacks.
> */
> struct device_link {
> @@ -779,6 +780,7 @@ struct device_link {
> enum device_link_state status;
> u32 flags;
> bool rpm_active;
> + struct kref kref;
> #ifdef CONFIG_SRCU
> struct rcu_head rcu_head;
> #endif
>
I kind of agree with this even though it adds overhead I originally wanted to
avoid.
If Greg doesn't object to that, I'll tentatively queue it up for 4.17.
Thanks,
Rafael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists