[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJhGHyA=uO4P4skas0-DZCE+cS453V+PrJMOFj2G2DAc1tE0jA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 00:02:42 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Naohiro.Aota@....com, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] workqueue: Introduce struct wq_node_nr_active
Hello, Tejun
On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 1:06 AM Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> @@ -4036,12 +4097,62 @@ static void wq_free_lockdep(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
> }
> #endif
>
> +static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
> +{
> + int node;
> +
> + for_each_node(node) {
> + kfree(nna_ar[node]);
> + nna_ar[node] = NULL;
> + }
> +
> + kfree(nna_ar[nr_node_ids]);
> + nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = NULL;
> +}
> +
[....]
> static void rcu_free_wq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> {
> struct workqueue_struct *wq =
> container_of(rcu, struct workqueue_struct, rcu);
>
> wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> + free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
for percpu workqueue, free_node_nr_active() will access out of bound.
> free_percpu(wq->cpu_pwq);
> free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
> kfree(wq);
[......]
> @@ -4832,8 +4950,13 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> wq_init_lockdep(wq);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wq->list);
>
> + if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND) {
> + if (alloc_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active) < 0)
> + goto err_unreg_lockdep;
> + }
> +
> if (alloc_and_link_pwqs(wq) < 0)
> - goto err_unreg_lockdep;
> + goto err_free_node_nr_active;
>
> if (wq_online && init_rescuer(wq) < 0)
> goto err_destroy;
> @@ -4858,6 +4981,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
>
> return wq;
>
> +err_free_node_nr_active:
> + free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
for percpu workqueue, free_node_nr_active() will access out of bound.
Thanks
Lai
> err_unreg_lockdep:
> wq_unregister_lockdep(wq);
> wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> --
> 2.43.0
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists