From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jinseob Kim" <kimjinseob88@gmail.com>
Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 7/8] iio: osf: add core KUnit tests
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 19:09:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260918190954.515801F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6915383a4a73b680e357d1a75106e0cf6e413084.1789753020.git.kimjinseob88@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] kunit: UAF in osf_session_producer due to missing kthread lifecycle action
- [Medium] kunit: mutex re-initialization in osf_test_new_session
--
commit b82aa72688edb8c728c31226b6fec70af9389122
Author: Jinseob Kim <kimjinseob88@gmail.com>
iio: osf: add core KUnit tests
This commit adds core regression test cases for frame handling, sample-cache
admission, and other operations for the Open Sensor Fusion IIO device.
It introduces KUnit configuration and build wiring to exercise these paths.
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_core_test.c b/drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_core_test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..d96753ab2a458
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_core_test.c
[ ... ]
> +static void osf_test_new_session(struct osf_test_context *ctx)
> +{
> + osf_test_cleanup(ctx);
> + osf_core_init(&ctx->osf, ctx->dev);
[Severity: Medium]
Does this code trigger a debugobjects warning by re-initializing an active
mutex?
osf_core_init() performs the following operations:
drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_core.c:osf_core_init() {
*osf = (struct osf_device) {
.dev = dev,
};
mutex_init(&osf->latest_lock);
}
By wiping the osf_device structure and calling mutex_init() again on
latest_lock without first calling mutex_destroy(), this can cause debugobjects
to emit an init active warning.
Could a cleanup of the old mutex be added, or the re-initialization avoided?
> + osf_core_start(&ctx->osf);
> + ctx->indio_dev = NULL;
> + ctx->buffer = NULL;
> +}
[ ... ]
> +static void osf_session_fault_buffer_race_test(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct osf_test_context *ctx = test->priv;
[ ... ]
> + producer = kthread_run(osf_session_producer, race, "osf-session-test");
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, producer);
[Severity: Medium]
Can this kthread leak and cause a use-after-free if the KUnit test is aborted
prematurely?
If the test is aborted due to a KUnit timeout or an unhandled signal, the
manual kthread_stop() at the end of the test will be bypassed. The KUnit
framework will then free the race structure, but osf_session_producer will
continue running in the background.
When the background thread subsequently accesses race->rx_lock or race->ctx,
it will access freed memory and potentially crash the kernel.
Could kunit_add_action() be used to guarantee the termination of the kthread
during test cleanup?
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_NE(test, wait_for_completion_timeout(&race->started, HZ), 0UL);
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/cover.1789753020.git.kimjinseob88@gmail.com?part=7
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-18 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-18 18:24 [PATCH v10 0/8] iio: add Open Sensor Fusion UART support Jinseob Kim
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 1/8] dt-bindings: iio: add Open Sensor Fusion device Jinseob Kim
2026-09-18 18:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-20 1:14 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-20 4:01 ` Kim Jinseob
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 2/8] Documentation: iio: add Open Sensor Fusion driver overview Jinseob Kim
2026-09-20 1:12 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-20 3:57 ` Kim Jinseob
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 3/8] iio: osf: add protocol decoding Jinseob Kim
2026-09-20 1:27 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-20 4:12 ` Kim Jinseob
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 4/8] iio: osf: add validated stream parser Jinseob Kim
2026-09-20 1:30 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-20 4:12 ` Kim Jinseob
2026-09-20 17:09 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 5/8] iio: osf: add UART transport and core receive path Jinseob Kim
2026-09-20 1:40 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 6/8] iio: osf: add IIO devices from capability reports Jinseob Kim
2026-09-20 2:03 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-20 4:20 ` Kim Jinseob
2026-09-20 5:07 ` Kim Jinseob
2026-09-20 17:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 7/8] iio: osf: add core KUnit tests Jinseob Kim
2026-09-18 19:09 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-20 2:12 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-18 18:24 ` [PATCH v10 8/8] iio: osf: add IIO " Jinseob Kim
2026-09-18 19:28 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-20 2:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-20 2:05 ` [PATCH v10 0/8] iio: add Open Sensor Fusion UART support Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-20 4:22 ` Kim Jinseob
2026-09-20 17:05 ` Jonathan Cameron
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=20260918190954.515801F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kimjinseob88@gmail.com \
--cc=robh@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.