[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <03b1b927-fb33-46e8-b38d-08e986f45672@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 10:06:07 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Chaohai Chen <wdhh66@....com>, martin.petersen@...cle.com
Cc: James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: fix missing lock protection
On 2/19/25 12:11 AM, Chaohai Chen wrote:
> async_scan_lock is designed to protect the scanning_hosts list,
> but there is no protection here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chaohai Chen <wdhh66@....com>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
> index 087fcbfc9aaa..9a90e6ba5603 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
> @@ -151,8 +151,12 @@ int scsi_complete_async_scans(void)
> struct async_scan_data *data;
>
> do {
> - if (list_empty(&scanning_hosts))
> + spin_lock(&async_scan_lock);
> + if (list_empty(&scanning_hosts)) {
> + spin_unlock(&async_scan_lock);
> return 0;
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&async_scan_lock);
> /* If we can't get memory immediately, that's OK. Just
> * sleep a little. Even if we never get memory, the async
> * scans will finish eventually.
Has it been considered to use scoped_guard() as in the untested patch
below?
Thanks,
Bart.
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
index 087fcbfc9aaa..efc90571ab47 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
@@ -151,8 +151,9 @@ int scsi_complete_async_scans(void)
struct async_scan_data *data;
do {
- if (list_empty(&scanning_hosts))
- return 0;
+ scoped_guard(spinlock, &async_scan_lock)
+ if (list_empty(&scanning_hosts))
+ return 0;
/* If we can't get memory immediately, that's OK. Just
* sleep a little. Even if we never get memory, the async
* scans will finish eventually.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists