linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen-blkback: fix shutdown race

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: <52E8E66F.4040009@citrix.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:30:55 +0000
From:	Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
CC:	Matt Rushton <mrushton@...zon.com>, Matt Wilson <msw@...zon.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
	<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen-blkback: fix shutdown race

On 29/01/14 08:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 28.01.14 at 18:43, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@...rix.com> wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c
>> +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c
>> @@ -985,17 +985,31 @@ static void __end_block_io_op(struct pending_req 
>> *pending_req, int error)
>>  	 * the proper response on the ring.
>>  	 */
>>  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&pending_req->pendcnt)) {
>> -		xen_blkbk_unmap(pending_req->blkif,
>> +		struct xen_blkif *blkif = pending_req->blkif;
>> +
>> +		xen_blkbk_unmap(blkif,
>>  		                pending_req->segments,
>>  		                pending_req->nr_pages);
>> -		make_response(pending_req->blkif, pending_req->id,
>> +		make_response(blkif, pending_req->id,
>>  			      pending_req->operation, pending_req->status);
>> -		xen_blkif_put(pending_req->blkif);
>> -		if (atomic_read(&pending_req->blkif->refcnt) <= 2) {
>> -			if (atomic_read(&pending_req->blkif->drain))
>> -				complete(&pending_req->blkif->drain_complete);
>> +		free_req(blkif, pending_req);
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Make sure the request is freed before releasing blkif,
>> +		 * or there could be a race between free_req and the
>> +		 * cleanup done in xen_blkif_free during shutdown.
>> +		 *
>> +		 * NB: The fact that we might try to wake up pending_free_wq
>> +		 * before drain_complete (in case there's a drain going on)
>> +		 * it's not a problem with our current implementation
>> +		 * because we can assure there's no thread waiting on
>> +		 * pending_free_wq if there's a drain going on, but it has
>> +		 * to be taken into account if the current model is changed.
>> +		 */
>> +		xen_blkif_put(blkif);
>> +		if (atomic_read(&blkif->refcnt) <= 2) {
>> +			if (atomic_read(&blkif->drain))
>> +				complete(&blkif->drain_complete);
>>  		}
>> -		free_req(pending_req->blkif, pending_req);
>>  	}
>>  }
> 
> The put is still too early imo - you're explicitly accessing field in the
> structure immediately afterwards. This may not be an issue at
> present, but I think it's at least a latent one.

Yes, thanks for catching that one, it's an issue that we should solve
now on this patch or else I would just be solving a race by introducing
a new one.

> Apart from that, the two if()s would - at least to me - be more
> clear if combined into one.

Ack, will see how the patch ends up looking after getting rid of the new
race.

Roger.

--
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/