From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@parallels.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for v3.19, v2] Avoid that sd_shutdown() triggers a kernel warning
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 01:33:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150114093302.GA17532@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1501121116220.1707-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 11:29:15AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> This seems like a good idea and the obvious (once it has been pointed
> out!) approach.
>
> Perhaps not directly related to the issue at hand is this question: In
> scsi_rescan_device() we will now have:
>
> mutex_lock(&shost->scan_mutex);
> if (dev->driver && try_module_get(dev->driver->owner)) {
> struct scsi_driver *drv = to_scsi_driver(dev->driver);
>
> if (drv->rescan)
> drv->rescan(dev);
> module_put(dev->driver->owner);
> }
> mutex_unlock(&shost->scan_mutex);
>
> What prevents the device from being unbound from its driver while the
> rescan runs? Evaluating the argument to the module_put() would then
> dereference a NULL pointer.
>
> Unbind events that happen through the normal scsi_remove_host()
> mechanism are fine, because scsi_remove_host() locks the scan_mutex.
> But what about writes to the driver's sysfs "unbind" attribute?
Looks like we should still get an unconditional reference to
the device using get_device in scsi_rescan_device at least.
But this seems like a more generic problem, and at least a quick glance at
the pci_driver methods seems like others don't have a good
synchroniation of ->remove against random driver methods.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-14 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-07 13:03 [PATCH for v3.19, v2] Avoid that sd_shutdown() triggers a kernel warning Bart Van Assche
2015-01-08 13:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-01-12 16:29 ` Alan Stern
2015-01-14 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2015-01-14 15:07 ` Alan Stern
2015-01-14 15:07 ` Alan Stern
2015-01-15 16:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-01-15 18:22 ` sysfs methods can race with ->remove Alan Stern
2015-01-15 19:40 ` Tejun Heo
2015-01-26 17:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-01-26 18:38 ` Alan Stern
2015-01-20 15:11 ` [PATCH for v3.19, v2] Avoid that sd_shutdown() triggers a kernel warning Alan Stern
2015-01-15 15:23 ` Don Brace
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150114093302.GA17532@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=jbottomley@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.