[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAG88wWZyodGU7AmTX=wYWn5igr-ySm_HLs0uA1iO+Fxq3msRnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:09:16 -0800
From: David Decotigny <decot@...glers.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: avoid use of reclaimed reference
I was considering the following scenario wherein the "if
(scsi_device_created(sdev))" test at the end would test garbage at
best (or unmapped data):
if (!(sdev = scsi_device_lookup_by_target(starget, 0))) { // not found
sdev = scsi_alloc_sdev(starget, 0, NULL); // -> ref cnt = 2
...
if (scsi_device_get(sdev)) { // -> ref cnt = 3
...
}
...
}
...
res = scsi_probe_and_add_lun(starget, // ->
ref cnt = 1
...
scsi_device_put(sdev); // -> reclaimed
if (scsi_device_created(sdev)) // test on garbage or unmapped data (#PF)
...
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:57 PM, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 17:10 -0800, David Decotigny wrote:
>> This patch avoids to use an object after it was potentially reclaimed
>> by scsi_device_put().
>
> The analysis is wrong, I'm afraid. __scsi_remove_device() does the
> final put for devices that are being destroyed. If the device isn't in
> the created state, then it's long lived and nothing in the report lun
> scan does the final put.
>
> James
>
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists