linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] PCI: Destroy pci dev only once

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: <4276127.HzbOlVUbc2@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Sat, 30 Nov 2013 00:45:55 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
	Guo Chao <yan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] PCI: Destroy pci dev only once

On Saturday, November 30, 2013 12:38:26 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 06:26:54 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > So assume pci_destroy_dev() is called twice in parallel for the same dev
> > > by two different threads.  Thread 1 does the atomic_inc_and_test() and
> > > finds that it is OK to do the device_del() and put_device() which causes
> > > the device object to be freed.  Then thread 2 does the atomic_inc_and_test()
> > > on the already freed device object and crashes the kernel.
> > >
> > thread2 should still hold one extra reference.
> > that is in
> >   device_schedule_callback
> >      ==> sysfs_schedule_callback
> >          ==> kobject_get(kobj)
> > 
> > pci_destroy_dev for thread2 is called at this point.
> > 
> > and that reference will be released from
> >         sysfs_schedule_callback
> >         ==> kobject_put()...
> 
> Well, that would be the case if thread 2 was started by device_schedule_callback(),
> but again, for example, it may be trim_stale_devices() started by acpiphp_check_bridge()
> that doesn't hold extra references to the pci_dev.  [Well, that piece of code
> is racy anyway, because it walks bus->devices without locking.  Which is my
> fault too, because I overlooked that.  Shame, shame.]
> 
> Perhaps we can do something like the (untested) patch below (in addition to the
> $subject patch).  Do you see any immediate problems with it?

Ah, I see one.  It will break pci_stop_bus_device() and pci_remove_bus_device().
So much for being clever.

Moreover, it looks like those two routines above are racy too for the same
reason?

Rafael

--
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/