linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] msi: fix imbalanced refcount of msi irq sysfs objects

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]

Message-ID: <20120104120248.4f4747bf@jbarnes-desktop>
Date:	Wed, 4 Jan 2012 12:02:48 -0800
From:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	nhorman@...driver.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	bhelgaas@...gle.com, gregkh@...e.de, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] msi: fix imbalanced refcount of msi irq sysfs objects

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:56:19 -0500 (EST)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 14:51:34 -0500
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:19:52AM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> >> On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 13:53:05 -0500
> >> Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 01:05:26PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> >> > > From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
> >> > > Date: Tue,  3 Jan 2012 10:29:54 -0500
> >> > > 
> >> > > > This warning was recently reported to me:
> >> > > 
> >> > > I've hit this too, see:
> >> > > 
> >> > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=132458146927890&w=2
> >> > > 
> >> > > and my analysis at:
> >> > > 
> >> > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-arch&m=132458391128660&w=2
> >> > > 
> >> > Yup, your analysis is correct. Regardless of the why behind msi enablement
> >> > failing, we need to gate the kobject_del/put in free_msi_irqs on successful
> >> > completion of kobject_init_and_add in populate_msi_sysfs.  This patch does that,
> >> > using the parent pointer as a flag.
> >> 
> >> I applied this to my -next branch; doesn't seem critical to land
> >> immediately.  If you disagree let me know and I'll pull it over to my
> >> for-linus branch instead.
> >> 
> >> Thanks,
> > I'm ok with it waiting, but I'll defer to Dave and others who have seen it
> > occur.  It sounds like its alot of log noise.
> 
> The bug only exists in the PCI -next code I thought.

Oh yeah, looks like it.  Lost track of my -next vs master branches
there...

Thanks,
-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)