[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2fdfc137.4e1c.186fd1b8f5a.Coremail.zyytlz.wz@163.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 11:41:27 +0800 (CST)
From: 王征 <zyytlz.wz@....com>
To: "Lars-Peter Clausen" <lars@...afoo.de>
Cc: "Jonathan Cameron" <jic23@...nel.org>, eugen.hristev@...labora.com,
nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re:Re: [PATCH] iio: at91-sama5d2_adc: Fix use after free bug in
at91_adc_remove due to race condition
At 2023-03-19 00:36:04, "Lars-Peter Clausen" <lars@...afoo.de> wrote:
>On 3/18/23 10:39, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 17:12:39 +0800
>> Zheng Wang <zyytlz.wz@....com> wrote:
>>
>>> In at91_adc_probe, &st->touch_st.workq is bound with
>>> at91_adc_workq_handler. Then it will be started by irq
>>> handler at91_adc_touch_data_handler
>>>
>>> If we remove the driver which will call at91_adc_remove
>>> to make cleanup, there may be a unfinished work.
>>>
>>> The possible sequence is as follows:
>>>
>>> Fix it by finishing the work before cleanup in the at91_adc_remove
>>>
>>> CPU0 CPU1
>>>
>>> |at91_adc_workq_handler
>>> at91_adc_remove |
>>> iio_device_unregister|
>>> iio_dev_release |
>>> kfree(iio_dev_opaque);|
>>> |
>>> |iio_push_to_buffers
>>> |&iio_dev_opaque->buffer_list
>>> |//use
>>> Fixes: 23ec2774f1cc ("iio: adc: at91-sama5d2_adc: add support for position and pressure channels")
>>> Signed-off-by: Zheng Wang <zyytlz.wz@....com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
>>> index 50d02e5fc6fc..1b95d18d9e0b 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
>>> @@ -2495,6 +2495,8 @@ static int at91_adc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> struct iio_dev *indio_dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>> struct at91_adc_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>>
>>> + disable_irq_nosync(st->irq);
>>> + cancel_work_sync(&st->touch_st.workq);
>> I'd like some input form someone more familiar with this driver than I am.
>>
>> In particular, whilst it fixes the bug seen I'm not sure what the most
>> logical ordering for the disable is or the best way to do it.
>>
>> I'd prefer to see the irq cut off at source by disabling it at the device
>> feature that is generating the irq followed by cancelling or waiting for
>> completion of any in flight work.
>The usually way you'd do this by calling free_irq() before the
>cancel_work_sync().
Hi,
Thank you for your response and feedback on my patch. I appreciate your input and would like to address your concerns.
Regarding the best way to disable the IRQ, I agree that calling free_irq() before cancel_work_sync() would be a better approach. This ensures that the IRQ is completely disabled at the source, and any in-flight work is finished before removing the driver. I will make this change in the patch.
Best regards,
Zheng Wang
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists