linux-kernel - RE: [Update][PATCH] ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks

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: <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E368CB5D05@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 Feb 2013 20:45:14 +0000
From:	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
CC:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Jiang Liu <liuj97@...il.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Myron Stowe <mstowe@...hat.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [Update][PATCH] ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and
 memory leaks



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@...k.pl]
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 4:04 AM
> To: Moore, Robert
> Cc: Toshi Kani; ACPI Devel Maling List; LKML; Bjorn Helgaas; Jiang Liu;
> Yinghai Lu; Yasuaki Ishimatsu; Myron Stowe; linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [Update][PATCH] ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and
> memory leaks
> 
> On Thursday, February 14, 2013 02:31:22 AM Moore, Robert wrote:
> > > > > I thought about that, but actually there's no guarantee that the
> > > > > handle will be valid after _EJ0 as far as I can say.  So the
> > > > > race condition is going to be there anyway and using struct
> > > > > acpi_device just makes it easier to avoid it.
> > > >
> > > > In theory, yes, a stale handle could be a problem, if _EJ0
> > > > performs unload table and if ACPICA frees up its internal data
> > > > structure pointed by the handle as a result.  But we should not
> > > > see such issue now since we do not support dynamic ACPI namespace
> yet.
> > >
> > > I'm waiting for information from Bob about that.  If we can assume
> > > ACPI handles to be always valid, that will simplify things quite a
> bit.
> >
> > If a table is unloaded, all the namespace nodes for that table are
> > removed from the namespace, and thus any ACPI_HANDLE pointers go stale
> and invalid.
> 
> OK, thanks!
> 
> To me this means that we cannot assume a handle to stay valid between a
> notify handler and acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() run from a workqueue.
> 
> Is there a mechanism in ACPICA to ensure that a handle won't become stale
> while a notify handler is running for it or is the OS responsible for
> ensuring that
> _EJ0 won't be run in parallel with notify handlers for device objects
> being ejected?
> 

It is up to the host.
Bob


> Rafael
> 
> 
> --
> I speak only for myself.
> Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.