[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <555B9C3A.40106@ispras.ru>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 23:25:30 +0300
From: Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>
To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
CC: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, target-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ldv-project@...uxtesting.org,
Sagi Grimberg <sagig@...lanox.com>
Subject: [BUG] iscsi-target: deadlock because of iscsit_get_tpg()
Hello,
Our tool reports a potential double lock because of quite strange code
in iscsit_get_tpg().
drivers/target/iscsi/iscsi_target_tpg.c:
int iscsit_get_tpg(
struct iscsi_portal_group *tpg)
{
int ret;
ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&tpg->tpg_access_lock);
return ((ret != 0) || signal_pending(current)) ? -1 : 0;
}
If mutex_lock_interruptible() successfully acquires the mutex, but there
is a pending signal, the function returns error, but it leaves the mutex
held. Callers do not expect such behaviour that can lead to a deadlock.
Why the check for pending signal is needed here?
Found by Linux Driver Verification project (linuxtesting.org).
Similar dangerous pattern presents in a couple of other places:
drivers/target/iscsi/iscsi_target.c:
int iscsit_access_np(struct iscsi_np *np, struct iscsi_portal_group *tpg)
{
...
ret = down_interruptible(&tpg->np_login_sem);
if ((ret != 0) || signal_pending(current))
return -1;
drivers/target/target_core_sbc.c:
static sense_reason_t
sbc_compare_and_write(struct se_cmd *cmd)
{
...
rc = down_interruptible(&dev->caw_sem);
if ((rc != 0) || signal_pending(current)) {
cmd->transport_complete_callback = NULL;
return TCM_LOGICAL_UNIT_COMMUNICATION_FAILURE;
}
--
Alexey Khoroshilov
Linux Verification Center, ISPRAS
--
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