linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: core: Don't free dev

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: <aW9_A22PyeYEgJOv@tzungbi-laptop>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 21:11:31 +0800
From: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: core: Don't free dev_name() manually

On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 11:02:55AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2026-01-19 at 22:28 +0800, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 09:45:26AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2026-01-18 at 03:32 +0800, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote:
> [...]
> > > > >  
> > > > >  static struct class shost_class = {
> > > > > @@ -279,11 +278,9 @@ int scsi_add_host_with_dma(struct
> > > > > Scsi_Host
> > > > > *shost, struct device *dev,
> > > > >   goto out_disable_runtime_pm;
> > > > >  
> > > > >   scsi_host_set_state(shost, SHOST_RUNNING);
> > > > > - get_device(shost->shost_gendev.parent);
> > > 
> > > We need a reference to the parent to prevent surprise removal ...
> > > where else is the reference held?
> > 
> > It looks to me the same question as above.  IIUC, device_add() holds
> > a reference count to its parent[3].  Drivers don't need to do it
> > explicitly.
> 
> That's not good enough for SCSI: we have a rather complicated state
> model for hosts.  device_add() doesn't occur until the host moves out
> of the SHOST_CREATED state, which can be quite a time after device
> _initialize() so something has to pin the resources until then, which
> is why these references are taken.   You're certainly free to suggest a
> different way of doing this, but you can't just get rid of the existing
> mechanism without replacing it with something else.

I may misunderstand: isn't the initial reference count from
device_initialize() held for the purpose (i.e., pin the resource)?  The
driver calls scsi_host_put() to drop the reference count when the underlying
chip is removing.

The proposed code to remove the get_device() just right before device_add()
in scsi_add_host_with_dma().  I don't see what else resources it can pin.