[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZQnd9CVWecNqHo5V@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 07:44:20 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>
Cc: jiangshanlai@...il.com, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] workqueue: Fix UAF report by KASAN in
pwq_release_workfn()
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 07:42:39AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The patch looks fine but
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 04:19:58PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> > @@ -4743,6 +4743,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> > wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> > err_free_wq:
> > free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
>
> Can you please add a comment here explaining why the flushing is necessary?
>
> > + if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
> > + kthread_flush_worker(pwq_release_worker);
Hmm... also, wouldn't it be clearer to flush from alloc_and_link_pwqs()
right after apply_workqueue_attrs() failed? That's the only case that
requires flushing, right?
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists