From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ed1-f54.google.com (mail-ed1-f54.google.com [209.85.208.54]) by mail19.linbit.com (LINBIT Mail Daemon) with ESMTP id 61CD51609AD for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2025 11:57:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ed1-f54.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-60867565fb5so3265589a12.3 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2025 02:57:44 -0700 (PDT) From: =?UTF-8?q?Christoph=20B=C3=B6hmwalder?= To: Jens Axboe Subject: [PATCH] drbd: add missing kref_get in handle_write_conflicts Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 11:57:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20250627095728.800688-1-christoph.boehmwalder@linbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Lars Ellenberg , Philipp Reisner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Sarah Newman , Lars Ellenberg , drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com List-Id: "*Coordination* of development, patches, contributions -- *Questions* \(even to developers\) go to drbd-user, please." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Sarah Newman With `two-primaries` enabled, DRBD tries to detect "concurrent" writes and handle write conflicts, so that even if you write to the same sector simultaneously on both nodes, they end up with the identical data once the writes are completed. In handling "superseeded" writes, we forgot a kref_get, resulting in a premature drbd_destroy_device and use after free, and further to kernel crashes with symptoms. Relevance: No one should use DRBD as a random data generator, and apparently all users of "two-primaries" handle concurrent writes correctly on layer up. That is cluster file systems use some distributed lock manager, and live migration in virtualization environments stops writes on one node before starting writes on the other node. Which means that other than for "test cases", this code path is never taken in real life. FYI, in DRBD 9, things are handled differently nowadays. We still detect "write conflicts", but no longer try to be smart about them. We decided to disconnect hard instead: upper layers must not submit concurrent writes. If they do, that's their fault. Signed-off-by: Sarah Newman Signed-off-by: Lars Ellenberg Signed-off-by: Christoph Böhmwalder --- drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c index e5a2e5f7887b..975024cf03c5 100644 --- a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c +++ b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c @@ -2500,7 +2500,11 @@ static int handle_write_conflicts(struct drbd_device *device, peer_req->w.cb = superseded ? e_send_superseded : e_send_retry_write; list_add_tail(&peer_req->w.list, &device->done_ee); - queue_work(connection->ack_sender, &peer_req->peer_device->send_acks_work); + /* put is in drbd_send_acks_wf() */ + kref_get(&device->kref); + if (!queue_work(connection->ack_sender, + &peer_req->peer_device->send_acks_work)) + kref_put(&device->kref, drbd_destroy_device); err = -ENOENT; goto out; base-commit: 456ef6804f232f3b2f60147046e05500147b0099 -- 2.49.0