[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <787f463c-85e9-c1f3-c772-1233e82a71b5@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 21:19:07 +0800
From: "wanghai (M)" <wanghai38@...wei.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC: <dledford@...hat.com>, <leon@...nel.org>, <markzhang@...dia.com>,
<liangwenpeng@...wei.com>, <liweihang@...wei.com>,
<haakon.bugge@...cle.com>, <rolandd@...co.com>,
<sean.hefty@...el.com>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/cm: Fix possible use-after-free in ib_cm_cleanup()
在 2021/10/14 2:24, Jason Gunthorpe 写道:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 05:30:16PM +0800, Wang Hai wrote:
>> This module's remove path calls cancel_delayed_work(). However, that
>> function does not wait until the work function finishes. This means
>> that the callback function may still be running after the driver's
>> remove function has finished, which would result in a use-after-free.
>>
>> Fix by calling cancel_delayed_work_sync(), which ensures that
>> the work is properly cancelled, no longer running, and unable
>> to re-schedule itself.
>>
>> Fixes: 8575329d4f85 ("IB/cm: Fix timewait crash after module unload")
>> Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@...wei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Wang Hai <wanghai38@...wei.com>
>> drivers/infiniband/core/cm.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/cm.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/cm.c
>> index c903b74f46a4..ae0af63f3271 100644
>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/cm.c
>> @@ -4508,7 +4508,7 @@ static void __exit ib_cm_cleanup(void)
>>
>> spin_lock_irq(&cm.lock);
>> list_for_each_entry(timewait_info, &cm.timewait_list, list)
>> - cancel_delayed_work(&timewait_info->work.work);
>> + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&timewait_info->work.work);
>> spin_unlock_irq(&cm.lock);
> No, this will deadlock:
>
> static int cm_timewait_handler(struct cm_work *work)
> {
> struct cm_timewait_info *timewait_info;
> struct cm_id_private *cm_id_priv;
>
> timewait_info = container_of(work, struct cm_timewait_info, work);
> spin_lock_irq(&cm.lock);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Holds the same lock
>
> What is your bug? The destroy_wq() a few lines below will flush out
> all the work so it is already not possible that work can still exist
> after the driver's remove function has finished.
>
> Jason
> .
Sorry, this is a wrong bugfix, thank you for pointing it out.
I was studying the code here and thought there might be a null
pointer reference problem.
You are right, I didn't take into account destroy_workqueue().
There are no bugs here. sorry for making this problematic patch.
Please ignore this patch.
--
Wang Hai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists