All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Alexander Egorenkov" <egorenar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2026 08:01:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260804080108.4DDF51F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260804074511.236153-3-egorenar@linux.ibm.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Missing synchronization in sclp_register() error path leads to Use-After-Free.
- [Medium] Concurrent execution of state_change_fn and receiver_fn corrupts the completion mechanism.
--

--- Patch [2]: [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns ---
commit 56ff5dbe692c5051e8907f572849ceb9402fdda1
Author: Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar@linux.ibm.com>

s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns

This commit adds a completion mechanism to prevent callbacks from being 
executed after a driver unregisters from the SCLP subsystem. It blocks 
sclp_unregister() until any inflight state change or receive callbacks 
have finished executing.

> It is sufficient to use only one completion per struct sclp_register
> because the callbacks state_change_fn() and receiver_fn() never get called
> in parallel.

[Severity: Medium]
Is this assumption accurate?

Looking at sclp_dispatch_state_change() and sclp_dispatch_evbufs(), both 
functions drop sclp_lock before invoking their respective callbacks. If a 
driver registers both callbacks (such as sclp_input_event in sclp_tty.c), 
could both dispatchers execute concurrently?

If they run in parallel, it seems they would both call reinit_completion() 
and complete() on the same reg->done completion, potentially corrupting it 
and causing a premature wakeup in sclp_unregister().

> diff --git a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c
> index 98e334724a627..8954f4260401b 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -885,6 +890,8 @@ sclp_register(struct sclp_register *reg)
>  	/* Trigger initial state change callback */
>  	reg->sclp_receive_mask = 0;
>  	reg->sclp_send_mask = 0;
> +	init_completion(&reg->done);
> +	complete(&reg->done);
>  	list_add(&reg->list, &sclp_reg_list);
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sclp_lock, flags);
>  	rc = sclp_init_mask(1);

[Severity: High]
If sclp_init_mask(1) fails here and returns an error, the listener is removed
from sclp_reg_list and sclp_register() returns the error to the caller.

Since the listener was briefly in the active list, could a hardware interrupt
have started executing the callback concurrently? 

If so, does this error path also need to call wait_for_completion(&reg->done)
before returning? Otherwise, it looks like a concurrently executing callback
could call complete(&reg->done) on a freed structure if the caller frees the
listener after the registration failure.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260804074511.236153-1-egorenar@linux.ibm.com?part=2

      reply	other threads:[~2026-08-04  8:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-04  7:45 [PATCH v2 0/2] s390/sclp: Misc fixes Alexander Egorenkov
2026-08-04  7:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] s390/sclp_ocf: Fix computation of length of GDS values Alexander Egorenkov
2026-08-04  7:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-04  7:45 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns Alexander Egorenkov
2026-08-04  8:01   ` sashiko-bot [this message]

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=20260804080108.4DDF51F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=egorenar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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.