linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] blk-cgroup: fix race between policy activation and blkg destruction

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3ec605aa-dd61-46eb-bcb6-282b482b90ea@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 13:44:10 +0800
From: Zheng Qixing <zhengqixing@...wei.com>
To: <yukuai@...as.com>
CC: <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <mkoutny@...e.com>, <yi.zhang@...wei.com>,
	<yangerkun@...wei.com>, <houtao1@...wei.com>, <tj@...nel.org>,
	<josef@...icpanda.com>, <axboe@...nel.dk>, <hch@...radead.org>, Zheng Qixing
	<zhengqixing@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] blk-cgroup: fix race between policy activation and
 blkg destruction

>> diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c
>> index 3cffb68ba5d8..600f8c5843ea 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-cgroup.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c
>> @@ -1596,6 +1596,8 @@ int blkcg_activate_policy(struct gendisk *disk, const struct blkcg_policy *pol)
>>    
>>    	if (queue_is_mq(q))
>>    		memflags = blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&q->blkcg_mutex);
>>    retry:
>>    	spin_lock_irq(&q->queue_lock);
>>    
>> @@ -1658,6 +1660,7 @@ int blkcg_activate_policy(struct gendisk *disk, const struct blkcg_policy *pol)
>>    
>>    	spin_unlock_irq(&q->queue_lock);
>>    out:
>> +	mutex_unlock(&q->blkcg_mutex);
>>    	if (queue_is_mq(q))
>>    		blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q, memflags);
>>    	if (pinned_blkg)
> Can you also protect blkg_destroy_all() will blkcg_mutex as well? Then all access for q->blkg_list will
> be protected.
Why does blkg_destroy_all() also need blkcg_mutex?

After finishing ->pd_offline_fn() for blkgs and scheduling 
blkg_free_workfn() in blkg_destroy(),
blkg_destroy_all() clears the corresponding policy bit in q->blkcg_pols 
to avoid duplicate policy
teardown in blkcg_deactivate_policy().